getRevision

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

No annotations present, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits (e.g., read-only nature, authentication needs, rate limits). The description carries the full burden but only states 'returns instance', which is insufficient for a get operation.

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 only one sentence, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It fails to convey essential information about the tool's behavior.

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 has 4 parameters including nested objects and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, how to use filters, or link the schema descriptions together functionally.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter has a description, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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?

Description 'Returns the specified instance' is vague and does not clearly identify that it returns a revision. It restates the tool name without adding specificity, and fails to distinguish from sibling tools like getRevisions.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getRevisions or other get tools. The description provides no context for appropriate usage scenarios.

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