Get an event annotation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds the HTTP method (GET) and that there is no request body, which are minor but useful details. It does not describe the response format or potential error cases, but given the annotations, this is adequate.

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 extremely concise—two sentences plus a reference link. The core purpose and endpoint are front-loaded, and the body-fields note is relevant. There is no superfluous content.

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?

The tool is a simple read-only GET with no output schema. The description includes the endpoint and a reference link for full documentation. It does not describe the return value, but for a retrieval operation with safe annotations, this is sufficient. It could mention what the annotation contains, but the reference covers it.

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 50%: the query object is documented, but the path parameters (eventID, annotationID) are not described. The description compensates by including the URL template that reveals both parameter names and their roles. It also clarifies there is no body. This adds meaningful context beyond the bare schema.

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 verb ('Get') and the resource ('an event annotation'), and the endpoint URL specifies the exact operation with parameters. It is unambiguous and distinguishes from the sibling tool xmatters_get_event_annotations (plural) by using the singular form.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like listing annotations. However, the singular resource and endpoint imply that this is for retrieving a specific annotation by ID. The usage context is implied but not explicitly contrasted with sibling tools.

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