get_change_by_id

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It only uses the word 'Retrieve' to indicate a read operation, but does not disclose what happens when the change_id is not found, error handling, return format (partially covered by output schema), or any access requirements. This is a minimal disclosure for a retrieval tool.

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 concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. However, the Args section is redundant with the input schema and does not earn its place. Overall, it is appropriately short but contains minor fluff.

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 get-by-id operation, the description is minimally viable. It states the core action, and an output schema exists so return values are covered. However, it lacks usage guidance and behavioral disclosure, making it incomplete in context. The presence of many sibling tools makes the lack of distinction more significant.

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 schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. However, the Args section simply restates 'change_id: The change ID', which adds no meaning beyond the parameter's name and schema title. It provides no examples, constraints, or additional context.

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 clearly states 'Retrieve a single change by ID', using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_changes' (plural, lists all) and 'filter_changes' (searches).

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that 'get_changes' or 'filter_changes' should be used for listing or searching, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage is implied only by the tool name.

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