Retrieve a specific approval strategy by its ID to inspect its configuration and apply it in approval workflows.
Get one approval strategy by id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| strategy_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.3.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Get' suggests a read-only operation, but the description does not disclose not-found behavior, permissions, or return payload characteristics.
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?
A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds value: 'Get', the resource, and the retrieval key are all present.
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 get operation, the tool is minimally usable: an agent can infer strategy_id and that a strategy should be returned. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the description could more explicitly state what is returned or what happens when the id does not exist.
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 only includes a required string parameter strategy_id, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description's 'by id' clarifies the parameter's role but adds no format, source, or validation details beyond what the schema already shows.
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?
States a specific verb and resource: 'Get one approval strategy by id.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like yaaif_approval_strategies_list, which retrieves multiple strategies.
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 'by id' implies this tool is for fetching a single known strategy, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over listing strategies or describe any exclusions or alternatives. Usage context is implied rather than explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.