basecamp_get_card

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get detailed information', which implies a read operation but does not specify return structure, scope, error behavior, or authentication needs. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation safety hints.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. Every word earns its place, making it maximally concise while still conveying the primary purpose.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description needs to explain return values or provide more context, but it does not. The phrase 'detailed information' is vague and gives no hint about what fields or data the response contains. For a two-parameter retrieval tool, the description is too sparse to be fully self-sufficient.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it does not. It adds no meaning to 'card_id' or 'project_id' beyond their names, and it does not explain their roles or format. The schema field names are self-explanatory but the description provides no additional semantic 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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'card' and explicitly targets 'a specific card', making it clear this is a single-card retrieval operation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like basecamp_list_cards, which handle listing. No ambiguity remains about the tool's core function.

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 phrase 'specific card' implies this tool is for retrieving one card's details rather than listing, but no explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. There are no stated exclusions, prerequisites, or mentions of related tools like basecamp_list_cards for finding card IDs. The usage context is only implied.

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