ghost_get_tag

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing behavior such as read-only nature, error handling, rate limits, or response format. This is a minimal, security-less description for a read operation.

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 that directly states the purpose. There is no filler or redundant phrasing, making it highly concise and structurally efficient.

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 one-parameter read tool with schema coverage, the description is minimally sufficient. However, 'full details' is vague, and no output schema or return format is specified. It lacks explicit detail on what 'full' means or any error handling, though such details are less critical for a straightforward get operation.

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?

The schema covers the only parameter (idOrSlug) with description 'Tag ID or slug (e.g. 'news', 'ai', or 24-hex ID)'. The tool description adds 'by ID or slug' which mirrors the schema, adding no new meaning. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline 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 states a clear verb ('Get'), specific resource ('a tag'), and access method ('by ID or slug'). It is unambiguous and distinct from siblings like ghost_list_tags or ghost_update_tag, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 like ghost_get_post or ghost_list_tags. The context for selecting this tool (e.g., needing a single tag's full details) is only implied by the verb and resource, not explicitly stated.

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