get_solution_category_by_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'View' implies a read operation, but it adds no context about authentication, error behavior, or any side effects. This is minimal and does not enrich the agent's understanding beyond the verb itself.

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 tool's purpose. The Args section is redundant with the schema but does not harm. It could be slightly leaner by omitting the redundant parameter restatement, but overall it is efficient.

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 is adequate but lacks guidance on when to use this vs. the list alternative and what happens if the ID does not exist. It covers the core invocation but not the surrounding context needed for robust tool selection.

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 only parameter description, 'The category ID', simply restates the parameter name without adding meaningful detail. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate, but it does not clarify the format, purpose, or any constraints beyond the name.

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 'View a specific solution category', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_solution_categories (which lists all) and create_solution_category by indicating 'specific' rather than general operation.

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 word 'specific' implies this tool is used when you have a particular category ID in mind, providing clear context for when to use. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling context makes the usage scenario evident.

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