get_stream

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only operation ('fetch') and specifies output content and order, but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive or clarify any potential side effects or rate limits. For a simple fetch, this is adequate though not extra.

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?

Extremely concise: two lines for purpose and usage, then a clear Args section. No wasted words; every sentence adds value. Front-loaded with the core operation.

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 is fairly complete: states what is returned (identity, purpose, notes), order (oldest first), and where to get the parameter. It could clarify 'thin view' but is sufficient for an agent to use correctly alongside siblings.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description includes an 'Args' section that explains the single 'stream' parameter is an ID from list_streams. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type definition and compensates fully for the lack of schema parameter descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool fetches a 'thin view' of a stream, listing identity, purpose, and notes ordered oldest first. The verb 'fetch' is specific to the resource 'stream', distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_streams which lists streams.

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?

Explicitly says to use this tool to 'recall or resume what's in a stream', providing clear context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or explicitly contrast with alternatives like get_entity, though the purpose is distinct enough.

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