get_resource

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

No annotations exist, so description must fully disclose behavior. It only states a read operation ('Get'), but omits details like error handling, return format, required permissions, or rate limits. The description fails to convey safety or side-effect absence beyond the implied read.

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?

Extremely concise (5 words), but lacks essential context. While brevity is valuable, the description sacrifices behavioral and usage guidance. It could be improved by adding a sentence about output or common use cases without becoming verbose.

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?

For a simple tool with one param and no output schema or annotations, the description is minimally complete in stating input and action. However, given the many sibling tools and lack of differentiation guidance, the description falls short of providing full context for an agent to select this tool correctly.

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 coverage is 100% (parameter 'id' documented as 'Resource UUID'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond restating the tool's action; baseline score of 3 applies because the schema already describes the parameter adequately.

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 states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'resource by ID', clearly indicating the action and target. It distinguishes from sibling get tools by specifying 'resource', though it could be more precise by noting the type of resource (e.g., 'a single resource' vs. 'resource').

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 on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., get_namespace, get_policy). No prerequisites or context provided about when this tool is appropriate.

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