get_unit

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It correctly labels the operation as a fetch (read-only). It does not disclose potential errors, authentication needs, or rate limits. For a simple retrieval tool, the transparency is adequate but minimal.

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 sentence of 5 words, front-loaded with the verb. Every word is necessary and there is no extraneous 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 tool's simplicity (1 param, no output schema), the description adequately states the purpose. However, it does not mention what the response contains (e.g., unit object) or behavior on lookup failure, leaving some ambiguity.

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 has 0% description coverage. The description adds that the unit_id is a UUID, which gives meaning beyond the schema's type 'string'. However, it does not elaborate on format, length, or constraints.

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 'Fetch a unit by UUID.' clearly states the action (fetch) and resource (unit), and specifies the identifier (UUID). It distinguishes from list_units which retrieves multiple units, and from other get_* tools which fetch different resources. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings.

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 implies usage when you have a unit UUID and need the corresponding unit object. However, it offers no explicit guidance on when not to use it (e.g., when you need all units) or alternatives like list_units.

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