Get a chord chart by id

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the safety profile of this read-only fetch. The description adds useful context about id provenance and re-rendering use, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond that. With annotations carrying the main burden, this is an adequate score.

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, zero filler. The principal action and identifier are front-loaded, and the use case is stated immediately after. Every word contributes.

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-only fetch tool with two documented parameters and readOnlyHint annotation, the description is nearly complete. It tells the agent why to use it and where the id comes from. Return format details are not described, but the format parameter schema already covers representations, and no output schema exists.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description elevates the score by explaining that the id is 'as returned by get_chord_chart_by_name,' adding provenance meaning beyond the schema's 'Numeric chord id.' This is a meaningful supplement for selecting a valid value.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch one specific chord voicing by its numeric id.' It also distinguishes this tool from get_chord_chart_by_name by noting the id is 'as returned by' that sibling, making the tool's unique role clear.

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 usage context: 'Use this to re-render a chart the user already saw without looking it up again.' This implies the agent should call this when an id is already available, not for a lookup. It does not explicitly name the alternative, but the guidance is strong enough.

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