zendesk_get_ticket

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the read operation and returned fields, but does not mention error handling, authentication, or rate limits. For a read tool, this is acceptable but could be more thorough.

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 that efficiently conveys the action, parameter, and returned fields. No wasted words.

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 existence of an output schema, the description does not need to detail return values fully. It lists key fields. For a simple get tool, it is fairly complete, though could mention that the ticket ID must exist.

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 0% description coverage. The description mentions 'by ID' but adds no further meaning about ticket_id format, range, or source. It provides minimal value beyond the schema's type information.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('a Zendesk ticket by ID'), and lists example returned fields (status, priority, etc.). It distinguishes from sibling tools like zendesk_get_tickets (plural) and update/create tools.

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 implies usage for retrieving a specific ticket by ID, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives like search or list tools. However, the purpose is clear enough for simple retrieval.

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