Stories: Get By ID

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, indicating safe, idempotent behavior. The description adds no additional behavioral details (e.g., response format, error handling, or the distinction between slim and full responses). It is adequate but does not enhance understanding 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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main action. It contains no redundant words or extraneous information, making it highly efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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?

Although the tool is simple, the description lacks details about the return format (e.g., what fields are included in 'slim' vs 'full'), potential errors (e.g., story not found), or default behavior. Given the output schema is absent and parameters are well-documented in schema, the description could be more helpful by specifying what the agent should expect.

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%: both parameters have descriptions in the input schema ('Return all fields (default: slim)' for 'full' and 'The story ID' for 'storyPublicId'). The tool description does not add any extra meaning or context beyond what is already in the schema, so it meets the baseline but provides no additional value.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('a Shortcut story'), and the identifier ('by public ID'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like stories-search (which retrieves multiple stories) and stories-update (which modifies). The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 state that this tool should be used when the story ID is known, nor does it direct users to search tools if the ID is unknown. With many sibling story tools, this lack of context could lead to suboptimal tool selection.

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