Get decisions

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds behavioral detail: results are ordered by blocking priority and include rationale, options, suggestion, and blocked/independent work flags. No contradiction with annotations.

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 dense sentence with no filler, front-loading the core resource. However, it is a sentence fragment rather than a complete declarative statement, which slightly reduces clarity.

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?

With an output schema present and full parameter documentation, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose and return content. The only missing element is explicit usage context, which is more of a usage-guidelines concern. Overall complete for a read-only list tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add any parameter-specific nuance; status filtering and sessionId semantics are left entirely to 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 identifies the resource as the decision queue and specifies its ordering (most blocking first) and content (why each matters, options, agent suggestion, blocked/independent work). It clearly implies a read-only retrieval operation, but lacks an explicit verb like 'returns' or 'lists'. It is distinguishable from sibling mutations by its focus on the queue.

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 for when to call this tool versus alternatives such as request_decision or record_decision, nor any mention of prerequisites beyond the sessionId in the schema. The usage context is only implied by the resource name.

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