get_queue

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating a safe, read-only operation. The description adds no further behavioral details (e.g., error handling, uniqueness of queue_id). It does not contradict annotations, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 efficient sentence: 'Get a single queue worker by id'. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 retrieval tool with 3 required parameters and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It could mention that the queue worker is identified within the context of a server and site, but the schema already indicates that. Overall, adequate.

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%, with each parameter having a brief description (e.g., 'The ID of the server'). The tool description itself does not add extra meaning beyond 'by id'. Baseline 3 is correct since the schema already covers all parameters.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'queue worker by id', clearly indicating a retrieval operation. However, it omits the context of requiring server_id and site_id, which are in the schema. The purpose is clear and distinct from sibling tools like list_queues or delete_queue.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_queues). No exclusion criteria or usage context is provided. The agent would have to infer 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.