Get Migration Plan

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It implies a read operation and mentions 'tracked state', but says nothing about permissions, failure modes, or what that state includes, leaving important behavioral context undisclosed.

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 wasted words. It states the action and resource immediately without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. The tool is simple, but the description still leaves gaps around parameter sourcing and usage context, making it only minimally complete for correct invocation.

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% for the single required migration_id parameter, and the description adds no meaning about its format or where to obtain it. The parameter name is somewhat self-explanatory, but the description does not compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 specific verb ('Read') and resource ('a persisted migration plan and its tracked state'), making the basic purpose clear. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like list_migration_plans, migration_status, or create_migration_plan, so an agent gets no explicit routing cue.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus list_migration_plans, migration_status, or other migration tools. The implicit context is retrieval by ID, but no explicit when-to-use or alternative is provided.

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