get_program

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations convey, which is acceptable but does not exceed expectations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise (three words) with no wasted text. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, such as specifying 'by ID'.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple read tool with one parameter and strong annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It lacks details about the return value (no output schema) and does not explain what a 'program' includes, but the tool name and common knowledge fill some gaps. Still, it could be more complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% coverage, with the parameter 'id' described as 'ID of the program program to retrieve'. The description does not add any additional meaning or context for the parameter, so it meets baseline expectations.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'Get a program', which uses a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_programs' (which likely returns a list), and does not mention retrieval by ID, though the input schema clarifies this. Still, the purpose is clear enough for a single-program retrieval.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_programs' or other get tools. No context on prerequisites or when to choose this over similar tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.