get_thread

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

No annotations provided; the description only says 'Get details', which implies a read operation. It fails to disclose behavioral traits like authentication requirements, error behaviors, or any side effects. Essential context is missing.

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 redundancy. However, it is too brief and lacks structure, missing critical details that would justify its length.

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 tool has two required parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description should at least outline what 'details' include. It fails to provide sufficient context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 0%, and the description adds no information about the parameters 'workspace' and 'threadSlug' beyond their names. It doesn't explain their format, purpose, or how to obtain them.

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 'Get details of a specific thread' clearly states the action (get) and resource (thread), with 'specific' implying a single thread by identifier. It differentiates from siblings like list_threads (listing) and delete_thread (mutation) without explicit mention.

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 like list_threads or delete_thread. The description implies you need a thread identifier but doesn't state prerequisites or context.

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