get-maintenance

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

No annotations exist, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the basic action and parameter usage, but does not mention that the tool is read-only, any authorization needs, rate limits, or what the response contains. This is insufficient for a tool with no 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?

Two sentences, each earning its place. The first sentence front-loads the primary purpose, and the second adds a key usage detail. No extraneous words or repetitions.

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's simplicity (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is adequate but could be more complete. It does not describe the return format, error handling, or prerequisites, which are not covered by structured fields.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats the schema's info on 'include' ('Comma-separated: Spaces, Tasks, Attachments, WorkOrders') without adding new meaning. For 'maintenanceId', it adds no extra context beyond the schema.

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 'Get details of a specific scheduled maintenance item' using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling 'list-maintenance' by implying single-item retrieval and mentions the 'include' parameter for related entities.

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 description provides guidance on using the 'include' parameter for related entities, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list-maintenance' or 'get-maintenance-spaces'. No when-not or exclusion criteria are given.

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