get_squad

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get a hiring squad by id' and gives no information about errors, response format, authentication requirements, or side effects. The minimal length offers no insight into operational behavior beyond the basic retrieval action.

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 with no filler. It efficiently communicates the core action and the licensing constraint, making it highly concise and well-structured for quick parsing.

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 simple get-by-id tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essential purpose and a licensing note. However, it omits practical details such as error handling, expected return values, or any preconditions beyond licensing. It is minimally adequate but lacks completeness for an agent to anticipate edge cases.

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%, so the description must compensate for parameter documentation. The phrase 'by id' hints that the team_id parameter is the squad identifier, but it does not explicitly confirm which parameter or add any details beyond the schema. Given the low coverage, this is insufficient compensation.

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 states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'hiring squad by id', making the core purpose clear. It implicitly differentiates from list_squads by focusing on a single entity. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools, so it lacks the full differentiation seen in top-tier descriptions.

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 includes a licensing prerequisite ('Growth plan and above') but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus list_squads or other alternatives. It does not state exclusions or conditions for selection, leaving the agent to infer that this is for fetching a specific squad by ID.

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