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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description's 'Get' behavior is consistent and adds context by specifying the returned information includes status and assignment. Since there is no output schema, this return-content hint provides meaningful behavioral detail beyond the 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence delivers the core purpose and key return fields without any filler. Every phrase contributes meaning, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 one-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation context and signals what the response contains. Minor ambiguity remains around what 'assignment' means exactly, but it does not block correct use.

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%, with document_id described as 'unique document ID'. The tool description does not add extra parameter detail, but the baseline is 3 because the schema already documents the only parameter sufficiently.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('full details of a single document'), with explicit contents ('status and assignment'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_signing_progress or list_documents, which target different or narrower data.

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 'full details of a single document' implies when to use this tool, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. There is no direct comparison with siblings such as get_signing_progress, download_document, or list_documents.

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