get_requested_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'Get', which implies read-only, but does not explicitly disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, authentication requirements, or side effects. More transparency is needed.

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 sentence and front-loads the key information. It includes relevant parent filter context without being overly verbose. However, it could be slightly more structured.

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 get-by-ID operation, the description covers the basic purpose and scope. However, it lacks explanation of the return value structure (no output schema) and the 'fields' parameter. Sibling tools have similar minimal descriptions, so it is adequate but not complete.

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 0%, meaning the schema provides no parameter descriptions. The description explains 'sys_id' as the identifier but does not explain the 'fields' parameter. It partially compensates but leaves a gap for the other parameter.

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 action (Get), the resource (requested item), and provides context about its relationship to parent requests. It distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying it's for a single item and mentions filtering by parent.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. It implies usage for single item by sys_id versus listing, but does not state alternatives or context for using this tool over others like list_requested_items.

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