retrieve_stateful_response

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

The description discloses return behavior (the reply and Response ID or a not-found message) which adds value beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not cover rate limits or detailed error scenarios, but the annotation already ensures safe usage.

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 very concise with two sentences and an Args bullet, front-loading the main purpose. Every sentence is necessary and no redundant information.

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 retrieval tool with one parameter and a readOnly annotation, the description covers the essential inputs and outputs. Minor gap: no mention of error handling for invalid IDs, but overall complete enough.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 0%, the description's 'Args' section explains that 'response_id' is the ID from a prior 'stateful_chat' call, adding significant meaning beyond the schema's type and title.

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 explicitly states 'Fetch a stored chat completion' with a specific resource and identifier, clearly differentiating from siblings like 'stateful_chat' (creation) and 'delete_stateful_response' (deletion).

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?

It specifies the prerequisite of a prior 'stateful_chat' call, providing clear context for use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, though the sibling names imply the distinctions.

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