get_build

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states what the tool does and gives parameter info, but does not reveal side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or other behavioral traits.

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 reasonably concise: two sentences for purpose, then parameter details. It is front-loaded with the main action. The parameter descriptions are slightly verbose but clear.

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?

An output schema exists, so the description need not cover return values. The tool is simple with two parameters, and the description covers purpose and parameter details. However, it lacks behavioral context (e.g., read-only nature) and does not mention any prerequisites.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant meaning by explaining valid values for 'build_source' ('rdc'/'vdc') and how to obtain 'build_id' via lookup_builds. This goes well beyond the schema's field names.

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 tool retrieves details of a specific build by its unique ID. The verb 'retrieve' and the resource 'build details' are specific. Among siblings like 'lookup_builds' which lists builds, this tool is distinct for fetching single-build details.

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 details the parameters and valid values ('rdc', 'vdc') and points to 'lookup_builds' for finding IDs. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or exclude contexts where it is not appropriate.

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