get_requester_by_id

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('Retrieve a single requester by ID') and does not mention important behavioral traits such as whether it returns null/404 if not found, authentication requirements, or any read-only constraints. The behavior is largely assumed but not explicitly disclosed.

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, with a clear opening line and a minimal Args listing. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or redundancy. The structure is straightforward and easy to scan.

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 tool with an output schema, the description covers the core purpose but leaves gaps: it does not mention error handling, auth requirements, or why this tool is preferred over alternatives. Given the simplicity, it is minimally viable but not fully contextualized.

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 has one parameter, requester_id (integer), and schema description coverage is 0%. The description's Args section merely restates 'The requester ID', which adds no meaningful semantics beyond the schema's title 'Requester Id'. It fails to provide additional context such as the expected format, range, or uniqueness of the ID.

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 a specific verb ('Retrieve') and a specific resource ('a single requester') with a clear scope ('by ID'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_requesters (plural) and filter_requesters, which serve different purposes.

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 implies its use case: when you have a requester ID and need the individual requester record. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this over alternatives like get_requesters or filter_requesters, nor does it mention exclusions. The usage is implied but not clearly articulated.

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