Get contract

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral value by explaining that the tool loads related data via the 'with' parameter and providing common relation values, which clarifies the response composition beyond the annotations.

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 two sentences with no waste. It front-loads the core purpose and then provides immediately useful examples for the 'with' parameter. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete for a read-only getter. It names the key relations and implies the return structure. The annotations cover safety, and the schema covers parameters. Some might expect more detail on response format, but the core needs are met.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by listing common 'with' values (products, client, products.product, products.status), which go beyond the schema's generic 'Relations to load' and help the agent understand valid options.

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 a single contract with its products and related data. The verb 'get' and resource 'contract' are specific, and the mention of 'products and related data' distinguishes it from list_contracts and cancel_contract.

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?

Usage is implied: the tool fetches a single contract by ID. It provides guidance on the 'with' parameter listing common relation values, but does not explicitly state when to use this over list_contracts or other getters, nor any exclusions.

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