Get Prompt

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

With no annotations, 'Retrieve' is the main behavioral disclosure, indicating a read-only operation without side effects. The description does not mention return shape, error behavior, or version-resolution behavior beyond what the schema already states, leaving some assumptions to the agent.

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 six-word sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded. Every word earns its place and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 no output schema, the description plus schema is mostly sufficient: the agent knows the required taskname and the optional version. It would be slightly stronger with an explicit statement of what is returned, but nothing essential is missing for a basic invocation.

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 both taskname and version already documented, including the 'defaults to latest' note. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('a prompt') with a clear key qualifier ('by task name'), so an agent can tell this fetches one prompt rather than performing a write. It does not explicitly contrast with listPrompts or setPrompt, so it misses the highest level of sibling differentiation.

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?

'By task name' implies the tool is used when you know the task identifier and need its prompt, but the description never states when to prefer this over listPrompts or setPrompt. There are no explicit when/when-not conditions or alternatives, so the agent must infer usage from the name and sibling context.

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