Get collection

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying the exact fields returned (title, slug, status, type, SEO fields), giving the agent insight into the output without needing a separate schema. It does not cover error cases or authentication, but for a simple read-only get, this is sufficient.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the core action and resource. It includes relevant field information without any filler or repetition, making it concise and easily parseable.

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 1-parameter read-only tool with a clear schema and a readOnlyHint, the description provides all necessary context: what it does and what it returns. No output schema is needed because the description already enumerates the returned fields, and no additional prerequisites or side effects are relevant.

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 already documents the single 'id' parameter with a description ('Collection ID (UUID)'), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no further parameter syntax or format details, only restating that the tool gets by ID, which matches the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('a single collection by its ID'), making it unambiguous. It also lists the fields returned (title, slug, status, type, SEO fields), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_collections or create_collection.

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 implies usage: use this when you need a specific collection by ID. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use an alternative like list_collections for multiple collections or get_category for categories, leaving the guidance implicit.

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