objectives-get-by-id

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It omits that this is a read-only operation, any authentication requirements, error conditions (e.g., invalid ID), or response format. This lack of context leaves the agent uninformed about side effects or constraints.

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 with no redundancy. Every word contributes to the understanding of the tool's function, making it highly concise.

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?

The tool is simple (get by ID) and the schema covers parameters adequately. However, the description does not mention the return structure (an objective object) or any pagination/limitations, leaving a minor gap. With no output schema, a brief note on return type would improve completeness.

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% as both parameters ('objectivePublicId' and 'full') have descriptions in the input schema. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a 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 'Get a Shortcut objective by public ID' uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Shortcut objective') with the identifier method ('by public ID'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like 'objectives-search' which would be for finding objectives via search criteria.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'objectives-search' for broader queries. The description implies usage for direct retrieval by ID but does not specify exclusions or prerequisites.

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