creatio_get_record

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly discloses the read-only, non-mutating nature via 'read-only GET', which is a key behavioral trait. It does not detail error handling or edge cases, but for a simple fetch operation, the transparency is adequate.

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 redundancy. Every phrase ('Fetch', 'single', 'by GUID Id', 'read-only GET') contributes to clarity and utility.

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 single-record fetch with no output schema, the description covers the essential usage and safety aspects. It does not explain return format or error behavior, but the operation is simple enough that the description is largely complete, especially given the schema already documents all parameters.

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 each parameter having a meaningful description (e.g., id includes an example, expand and select are briefly defined). The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics; the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already provides full coverage.

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 (Fetch), the resource (Creatio record), and the exact identifier (GUID Id). The 'read-only GET' suffix further clarifies the operation and differentiates it from sibling tools like cretio_list_allowed_entities and creatio_query_records, which handle listing and querying, respectively.

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 wording 'single record by its GUID Id' gives clear context for when to use this tool – when you have a specific record ID. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusions, but the context implies it is not for listing or multi-record queries, which are covered by siblings. This is a clear usage hint without explicit exclusions.

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