clickup_get_goal

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the tool's safety profile is clear. Description adds value by specifying the default return format (Markdown) and error handling (404 for missing/deleted goal), which are behavioral details beyond 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?

Descriptions is well-structured with clear sections (When to Use, When NOT to Use, Returns, Examples, Error Handling). Every sentence adds value, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to detail return fields. It mentions the Goal's fields and Key Results, which is sufficient. Error handling is covered, and annotations provide safety context. The tool is simple with only two parameters, so the description is 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?

Input schema provides descriptions for both parameters (goal_id as UUID, response_format as enum), but schema description coverage is 0%. Description adds an example with goal_id and mentions the return format, giving practical context not in the schema. However, it does not explicitly describe the response_format parameter.

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?

Description clearly states it gets a single Goal's full detail including Key Results, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool `clickup_get_goals` which is for listing.

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?

Explicitly includes 'When to Use' and 'When NOT to Use' sections, providing clear guidance to use this tool for inspecting one goal's progress before editing, and to use `clickup_get_goals` for listing many goals.

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