get_contract_by_id

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

No annotations are available, and the description only says 'View,' which implicitly indicates a read operation but without any details about return behavior, error cases, or side effects. It doesn't disclose what information is retrieved or any dependencies.

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 very short and front-loaded, but the param line adds no value since it duplicates the schema. It's structurally fine but not substantive.

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 fetch with an output schema, the description may suffice for the basic action, but it omits usage context and any behavioral caveats, making it incomplete for an AI agent that needs to know when to select this tool.

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 description repeats the parameter name and type ('contract_id: The contract ID') without adding semantics beyond the schema. With 0% schema coverage, more detail about the parameter (e.g., format, uniqueness, required) would be needed.

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 uses the clear verb 'View' with the resource 'a specific contract,' indicating this tool fetches a single contract by ID. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool get_contracts, which likely lists contracts, though it doesn't explicitly name the sibling.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_contracts or filter_contracts. It only states it views a specific contract, leaving the appropriate context to be inferred.

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