Get tag

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and a non-destructive profile, so this is clearly a safe read operation. The description adds the useful behavioral note that the full tag object is returned ('with all fields'), but it does not describe error cases or response shape. This is adequate but not rich behavioral context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes meaning: fetch, single tag, ID, all fields. It is appropriately minimal for a simple get-by-id operation.

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 single-resource lookup with strong annotations, the description is complete enough: it states the operation, the input, and that all fields are returned. It does not enumerate the tag fields, but the domain context and sibling tools provide adequate grounding, and no complex behavior needs explaining.

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?

The only parameter, 'id', is self-descriptive and its type and constraints are fully specified in the input schema. The description confirms its role via 'by ID' but adds no additional semantic detail. With one trivial parameter this meets the minimum viable standard, though schema description coverage is technically 0%.

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 states a specific verb ('Fetch'), a specific resource ('a single tag'), and the access mechanism ('by ID'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_tags, update_tag, and delete_tag. The added 'with all fields' further clarifies the expected return scope.

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 'a single tag by ID' gives a clear context: use this when you have a known tag ID and need that tag's data, not when listing or searching tags. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the usage context is clear enough for this simple operation.

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