get_batch

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the read-only and non-claiming behavior, which is transparent about side effects. No additional traits (e.g., rate limits) are mentioned, but for a simple read operation, this is sufficient.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and safety attributes. No filler, perfectly front-loaded.

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 one-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the essential aspects. It could mention the return format, but the lack is not critical for this straightforward retrieval.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a description for batchId. The description adds 'by ID', which is redundant with the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as no additional parameter semantics are added.

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 the tool retrieves details of a batch by ID. It explicitly adds 'read-only, does not claim', effectively distinguishing it from siblings like claim_next_batch and release_batch.

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 clear context that the tool is read-only and non-claiming, guiding use away from mutation operations. While it doesn't explicitly state when to use it, the inference is straightforward from the description.

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