get-error-tracking-issue

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'Get detailed information', implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm that no side effects occur. Missing details on permissions, rate limits, or potential errors (e.g., invalid issue ID). The description could be more transparent about the operation's nature.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a simple retrieval 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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description should provide more context about what 'detailed information' includes (e.g., error details, stack traces, timestamps). It also lacks handling of error cases or any description of the return format. For a getter with a complex response, this is insufficient.

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 has 100% coverage with a description for the only parameter 'issueId'. The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score is appropriate since schema handles the parameter documentation.

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 the verb 'Get' and the resource 'detailed information about a specific error tracking issue'. It implies a single issue retrieval, distinguishing from sibling 'list-error-tracking-issues' which lists multiple issues. However, it does not explicitly mention that it requires an issue ID, which could be clearer.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that this tool is appropriate when you have a specific issue ID, while 'list-error-tracking-issues' is for browsing all issues. No exclusions or context signals are given.

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