fetch_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. 'Fetch ... including its source code' implies a read-only retrieval and hints at return content, but it does not disclose failure behavior, permissions, whether source code is truncated, or any side effects.

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 concise sentence with no filler. The core action and key differentiator ('including its source code') are immediately visible.

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?

This is adequate for a simple single-parameter fetch operation, but with no output schema and no annotations it could usefully mention return format, not-found behavior, or the relationship to list_tools for obtaining a valid tool_id. The absence of requiredness information for tool_id is also left ambiguous.

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 only parameter, tool_id, is already fully described in the schema ('The ID of the tool to fetch'), and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, such as how to obtain the ID or whether it is required.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('a tool'), and the added phrase 'including its source code' clarifies what makes this different from list_tools or execute_tool. An agent can tell this is a retrieval operation for a single tool's definition.

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 on when to use this tool versus list_tools, execute_tool, or edit_tool. It does not state that fetch_tool is for reading a single tool's details/source before modifying or executing it, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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