get_submission_by_id

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

Discloses authorization context and read-only nature. No annotations exist, so description carries burden; it lacks details on error handling or idempotency but is adequate for a simple retrieval.

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 concise sentences with front-loaded purpose. No wasted words.

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?

Covers purpose and authorization but omits return format and parameter details. With no output schema, the description should offer more on what the response contains.

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 0%. Description does not explain the parameters beyond mentioning 'by ID'. Does not add meaning to 'submission_id' or 'competition_id' beyond their names.

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?

Immediately states verb 'Get' and resource 'submission by ID'. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_my_submission' and 'download_submission_text'.

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?

Specifies scope and authorization (competition.read, caller can only read accessible submissions) which helps decide when to use. However, no explicit alternative or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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