Get engineering bounty

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying what the returned record contains (requirements, deliverables, acceptance tests), which is beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and output content. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with key information.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is complete. It explains what the tool fetches (full record with specific components), which is sufficient for an AI agent to understand the return value.

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 the single required 'id' parameter fully described (UUID format, pattern). The description does not add additional parameter meaning or usage hints, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses specific verb 'fetch' and resource 'full public bounty record', clearly indicating it retrieves a single bounty by ID. It also lists included content (requirements, deliverables, acceptance tests), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'search_bounties' which returns multiple results.

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?

While no explicit when-not or alternative naming is present, the description implies usage when a single bounty record is needed by ID. The existence of 'search_bounties' as a sibling provides context, but the description itself doesn't guide the agent on choosing between them.

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