instructions_get_by_id

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose return content (status, target info, parameters, approval state), which is useful, but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, has no side effects, or how missing IDs are handled. The verb 'Get' implies read-only but leaves these details implicit.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the second sentence efficiently lists the returned information. Every word contributes to the tool's meaning.

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 one-parameter getter with no output schema or annotations, the description adequately covers the return summary and action. It could be more explicit about this being for regular instructions only and about error behavior when the ID does not exist, but the low complexity and clear sibling naming reduce the impact of those omissions.

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 the parameter documented as 'Integer ID'. The description's phrase 'by its integer ID' adds no new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get an Instruction by its integer ID.' It also lists what is returned (status, target info, parameters, and approval state), which distinguishes it from sibling getters for scheduled or persistent instructions.

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 implies this tool should be used when an integer ID is known, but it does not explicitly say when to use it versus alternatives like instructions_search or scheduled_instructions_get_by_id. No exclusions or direct routing to siblings are provided.

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