passgage_get_assignment_request

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits by itself. It only states 'Get a specific assignment_request by ID'—the literal function—without noting error behaviors, return format, or permissions. This adds no depth beyond the name.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential purpose without redundancy. Every word is purposeful and no filler exists.

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?

For a straightforward read operation with one documented parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential information. It lacks any nuance like error handling or relationship to related requests, but given the simplicity, it is adequately complete.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with a clear description for 'id'. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics; since schema_coverage is high, 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 clearly specifies the action 'Get' and the resource 'assignment_request' with the qualifier 'specific ... by ID', distinguishing it from list or create counterparts. This unambiguously states what the tool does.

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 explicit usage guidance is provided—there are no mentions of when to prefer this over list_assignment_requests or what prerequisite (the ID) is needed. The need for an ID is implied by the schema and description, but the tool description does not articulate selection criteria.

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