swsd_get_catalog_item

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. Building on that, the description adds useful behavioral context about the response: variables represent a form schema, each variable has id/name/kind/options, the id maps to custom_field_id for create-service-request, and the full top-level item is passed through. It stops short of discussing auth, rate limits, or error behavior, but it adds substantive context beyond the annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core action and purpose, then layers in usage and variable detail. It is relatively long, and some variable-shape detail overlaps with the output schema, but the content is purposeful and directly helps an agent decide and act.

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 one-parameter read tool with a full output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description is complete: it explains what is returned, how the returned variables should be used with create-service-request, and where the id comes from. No critical information needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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%, and the single id parameter is already fully documented in the schema as 'Catalog item id from swsd_list_catalog_items.' The description repeats the same source without adding format, constraints, or alternative meanings for the input parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get a single SWSD catalog item by id, including its variables.' It distinguishes itself from the sibling list tool by emphasizing 'single ... by id' and by pointing to 'swsd_list_catalog_items' as the source of the id, so an agent can route correctly without opening schemas.

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 gives clear context for use: 'Use the variables to know which fields to populate when submitting a service request,' and it names the downstream tool (create-service-request). It does not explicitly cover when not to use this tool or state prerequisites, so the guidance is strong but not exhaustive.

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