get_story

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

No annotations and no output schema, so the description carries the full burden yet only says 'detailed information' without disclosing what fields are returned, whether it errors on a missing UUID, or any permission requirements.

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?

A single short sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though it is terse to the point of under-specification rather than optimally informative.

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 one-parameter read tool this is minimally viable, but with no annotations and no output schema the definition should hint at what 'detailed information' includes or how failures are handled. The gaps are modest given the tool's simplicity.

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% for the single required story_id, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's own documentation of story_id.

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?

It clearly states a specific verb (get) and resource (story) with a scope qualifier ('detailed information'), so an agent understands the operation. However, it does not distinguish this from adjacent getters like get_issue, get_epic, or get_project.

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 on when to use this over list_stories, search_issues, or other getters, and no prerequisites or exclusions are stated. The agent must infer the retrieval use case from the name alone.

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