get_service_request

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get' implies a read operation, and the phrase 'including current step, phase, and requestSteps' usefully discloses response content. However, it does not mention error behavior, whether requestSteps are expanded or referenced, or any access requirements.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action, resource, and key response content efficiently.

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 get-by-id tool, the description provides enough information to select and invoke it. The lack of an output schema is partially mitigated by naming included fields, though response shape, error cases, and relationship to workflow-specific siblings are not addressed.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the single 'id' parameter already documented as 'ServiceRequest id'. The description only repeats the 'by id' concept and adds no format, type, or usage nuance beyond the schema.

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 fetches a single service request by id and specifies key returned fields (current step, phase, requestSteps). It is distinguishable from list_service_requests, though it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like get_service or get_workflow_status.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. An agent must infer that this is for single-record lookup rather than listing requests or checking workflow status. No conditions, exclusions, or alternative routing are mentioned.

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