get_build

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. 'Get' clearly signals a read-only operation, and 'detailed information' implies a response payload. However, it does not disclose response format, error behavior, or any auth requirements. This is minimally transparent but not rich.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded and easy to scan. It could arguably be more informative, but it is not verbose or redundant.

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 get-by-ID tool, the description is minimally adequate: the schema fully covers the parameter, and the purpose is clear. However, there is no output schema and no annotations, so the description should have mentioned what 'detailed information' includes or how to obtain the build ID from sibling tools like list_builds.

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 schema already fully documents the only parameter buildId with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional semantic context, such as where to obtain the ID or expected format. With schema coverage at 100%, 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?

Clearly identifies a read operation for a single build ('Get detailed information about a specific build'), which distinguishes it from list_builds (all builds) and other resource-specific getters. The verb 'Get' and resource 'build' are specific.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this should be used after obtaining a build ID from list_builds, nor does it exclude cases where list_builds is more appropriate. The description provides no decision-making context.

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