get_console_message

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint: true, which already signals a safe read operation. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as return format, error handling, or side effects, so it provides minimal value beyond the annotation.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and then efficiently points to the sibling for the broader operation. No redundant or filler content.

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?

Given the low complexity (one parameter, no nested objects), the presence of read-only annotation, and full schema coverage, the description adequately covers the necessary context. It provides the key distinction from the list operation and is complete for a simple retrieval tool even without an output schema.

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?

Schema coverage for the single parameter msgid is 100%, with a description that clarifies it comes from listed console messages. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, so the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage 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 uses a specific verb 'Gets' with a resource 'console message' and qualifies 'by its ID', clearly indicating a targeted retrieval. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tool list_console_messages by noting the alternative for retrieving all messages.

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 explicitly states that for all messages, use list_console_messages, implying this tool is for a single message by ID. This provides clear guidance on when to use this tool versus an alternative.

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