Retrieve a specific collection by ID from Fastidious AI. Optionally include its child notes and collections for a complete view.
Get a collection by ID, optionally including its children
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | ID of the collection to retrieve | |
| includeChildren | No | Whether to include child notes/collections |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read operation via "Get" and notes the optional child expansion, but says nothing about error behavior for missing IDs, permission needs, or the depth/shape of the returned children.
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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the core action comes first and the optional behavior is attached compactly. Every word 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?
For a simple two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage this is minimally viable, but with no output schema the description should say more about what a collection and its children look like, or what happens on a bad ID.
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 both parameters are already documented in the schema; the description only restates them without adding format, depth, or performance meaning for includeChildren. Baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ("Get a collection by ID"), and the "by ID" qualifier cleanly separates it from list_collections. It does not name or contrast with any sibling explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.
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 phrase "optionally including its children" hints at when the extra parameter is warranted, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus list_collections or get_note, and no prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.