swsd_get_incident

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and open-world. The description adds details about passthrough behavior, custom_fields_values inclusion, and the effect of detail_level. No contradiction with 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?

Three sentences that are front-loaded with the primary purpose, then provide critical usage guidance and parameter behavior. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema and well-described parameters, the description covers all necessary aspects: purpose, when to use alternatives, parameter behavior, and special features. It is complete for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 is 100% with descriptions, but the description adds value beyond the schema: for 'id', it explains auto-detection via digit count; for 'detail_level', it provides usage scenarios (e.g., 'show me everything'). This enhances parameter understanding.

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 'Fetch one SWSD incident by numeric ID' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like swsd_list_incidents (list) and swsd_update_incident (update), and mentions passthrough behavior.

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?

Explicitly advises to use swsd_list_incidents first if only a name or filter is available, noting that IDs are not guessable. Also provides guidance on when to use detail_level='long' (when user wants 'everything' or comments/attachments).

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