Get case

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses meaningful behavior: private cases you own return a shareUrl, the link is view-only (no voting/joining), and links can be rotated to revoke. This adds permission and security-relevant context not present in the structured annotations.

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 concise and front-loaded with the core purpose, then adds one targeted behavioral note about shareUrl. Both sentences earn their place with no redundancy or filler.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential use and an important edge case (private-case shareUrl). It does not enumerate response fields or error conditions, but the low complexity and read-only annotation make the definition sufficiently complete.

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 input schema already documents the sole parameter with a clear description including the UUID pattern and the note about using the case uuid rather than the numeric id. Schema description coverage is 100%, so the tool description does not need to add parameter detail, and it provides none.

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 detailed information about a specific case.' It distinguishes itself from search/list tools by emphasizing a single specific case, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives like get_case_activity.

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 when to use the tool: whenever detailed information about a specific case is needed. It adds context about private-case shareUrl behavior, but it does not explicitly address when not to use it or how it compares to alternatives such as search_cases or get_case_activity.

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