get-service

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but offers minimal behavioral insight. It states it retrieves a service by ID but doesn't disclose whether this is a read-only operation, what happens if the ID is invalid, authentication requirements, or rate limits. This leaves significant gaps for a tool that likely interacts with a backend system.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action ('Get a specific service') and specifies the key input ('by its id'), making it easy to scan and understand quickly.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage (0%), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what a 'service' is in this context, what data is returned, error handling, or how it differs from similar tools like 'get-app'. For a retrieval tool in a system with multiple sibling tools, more context is needed.

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?

The description mentions the parameter ('by its id'), which aligns with the single 'id' parameter in the schema. However, schema description coverage is 0%, so the description adds basic meaning but doesn't compensate fully—it doesn't explain the 'path' nesting or provide format examples. With one parameter, the baseline is slightly above minimal.

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 resource ('a specific service'), making the purpose understandable. It distinguishes from siblings like 'list-services' by specifying retrieval of a single item by ID. However, it doesn't explicitly mention what 'service' refers to in this context, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., needing a service ID), compare it to 'list-services' for browsing, or specify error conditions. Usage is implied but not explicitly stated.

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