get_record

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states that it 'gets' a record, which is already evident from the name. It does not mention error handling (e.g., what happens if the reference is not found), return format, or any side effects, leaving the agent with limited understanding of the tool's runtime behavior.

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 one concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no redundant information and earns its place.

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 tool with a single, well-described parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. It tells the agent what the tool does and how to specify the input. However, it lacks any mention of the return value or possible response structure, which would be helpful for an agent to interpret results.

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 already includes a description for the single parameter 'reference' with examples (e.g., DEVELOP-123 or ADT-123-1), so the description adds little beyond what the schema provides. The tool description's phrase 'by reference number' reinforces the parameter's usage but does not offer new details.

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 the tool gets an Aha! feature or requirement by reference number, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_page (pages), search_documents (search), and create_feature (create).

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 the tool should be used when you have a reference number to fetch a specific record, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. There is no comparison with sibling tools or exclusions.

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