Get View Work Items

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no behavioral details such as pagination behavior, sorting, or return format. With annotations present, a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and immediately providing a useful usage hint. Every word earns its place with no waste.

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 read-only listing tool with 100% schema coverage and safety annotations, the description is complete enough. It tells the agent what the tool does and how to approach it when only the view name is known. Missing pagination/sorting details are already in the schema.

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 100%, so the schema documents all four parameters. The description only reinforces that the view is identified by ID, adding no meaningful semantics beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool's function: 'List work items under a view by view ID.' This is a specific verb and resource that distinguishes it from sibling tools like view_search (which searches for views) and workitem_get (which fetches a single work item).

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 description provides an explicit alternative: 'Use view_search first when you only know the view name.' This gives clear context for when to use this tool versus another, though it doesn't cover other possible alternatives like workitem_query.

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