get_custom_field

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe, idempotent read. The description adds no further behavioral details (e.g., auth requirements, rate limits, or what happens if ID not found). It is consistent with annotations but does not extend them.

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 sentence of 8 words, front-loading the verb and resource. Every word is necessary; there is no redundancy or fluff. It is perfectly concise for a simple retrieval tool.

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 (one parameter, full schema coverage, strong annotations), the description is adequate. It does not explain return format or error cases, but with no output schema required, the description covers the essential purpose. Slightly more detail about expected outputs would push it to 5.

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% (the sole parameter 'id' is fully described in the schema). The description merely repeats 'by ID' without adding meaning beyond the schema, which already defines it as a positive integer entity ID. Baseline of 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 states the action (Get) and the resource (custom field definition), and specifies the identifier (by ID). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_custom_fields (which retrieves all) and create/update/delete variants.

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 usage for retrieving a single custom field by ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over list_custom_fields (e.g., when you have a specific ID) or when not to use it (e.g., when you need all fields). No alternatives are mentioned.

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