Get Tag

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

Annotations already signal readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds that project context must already be set and what data the response includes, but does not cover error behavior, authentication specifics, or versionId semantics. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

One sentence that front-loads the tool's purpose ('Get a single endpoint tag') and packs in the returned fields plus a prerequisite without any filler.

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 read tool, the description covers its action, key return fields, and the context prerequisite. It does not explain the behavior when versionId is omitted or when the tag is not found, but the 100% schema coverage and readOnlyHint compensate for most gaps.

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 100%, and all three parameters are described in the schema with GUID types and optionality. The description adds no parameter-level information beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a single endpoint tag') and enumerates the returned fields (description, icon, display order, endpoint count), distinguishing it from list_tags by the 'single' qualifier.

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 gives a clear context requirement ('Requires project context') and implies single-item retrieval, but it does not explicitly name list_tags as the alternative for listing multiple tags or state when not to use this tool.

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