Retrieve a single trainee's complete record by their Digiforma ID, including all associated training sessions in one request.
Get a single trainee by id, including their training sessions.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | The trainee's Digiforma id. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that training sessions are included, which is useful, but it does not mention read-only behavior, error cases (e.g., not found), authentication requirements, or response format beyond the inclusion of sessions.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning: the action, the target, the lookup key, and the included related data.
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 low-complexity single-parameter getter, the description is mostly complete: it identifies what is returned ('including their training sessions'). It lacks explicit error semantics or output shape, but those are less critical given the simple nature of the 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?
Parameter schema coverage is 100% and the description essentially restates the id parameter. It adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.
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 names a specific verb and resource ('Get a single trainee by id') and adds a distinctive scope: 'including their training sessions.' This clearly differentiates it from siblings like digiforma_list_trainees, which would return many trainees.
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 phrase 'by id' gives a clear retrieval context and implies this tool is for a single known trainee, not for listing or searching. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended use case is evident from the description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.