get_test_plan

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

No annotations provided, so description bears the burden. It lists returned fields but does not state read-only nature, error behavior, or idempotency. Adequate but minimal.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. Every word serves a purpose.

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 retrieval tool with one parameter, the description is nearly complete. Could mention what happens if id not found, but overall sufficient given sibling context.

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?

Adds value beyond schema by providing example key format (FS-TP-43) and advising to prefer internal id for subsequent calls. Schema coverage is 100%, but description enriches understanding.

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?

Clearly states the function: getting a test plan by key or internal ID. Distinguishes from siblings like get_test_case and get_test_cycle by specifying the target resource and return fields.

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?

Provides a concrete usage hint: 'Use the internal id when calling link/unlink/get_linked_test_cycles.' However, does not explicitly contrast with search_test_plans for when to use each.

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