get-test-suite

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It only states the action and identifier, without disclosing whether the operation is read-only, error handling, or any side effects. 'Get' implies read, but this is not explicitly stated.

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 concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb. Every word serves a purpose, but it is so brief that it sacrifices some clarity on usage and parameters.

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 tool has three parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks usage guidelines, behavioral details, and does not hint at what 'details' are returned, making insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool in context.

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 67% (two of three parameters have descriptions), but the description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. It references 'id' via 'by UUID' but does not explain the 'fields' or 'include' parameters.

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 'Get test suite details by UUID', specifying both the action (get) and the resource (test suite details). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get-test-suite-by-name' by emphasizing the UUID identifier.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get-test-suite-by-name' or 'list-test-suites'. The mention of 'by UUID' implicitly requires a UUID, but does not help the agent choose the correct tool in context.

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