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

The annotations establish that this is a read-only operation, and the description adds that it retrieves both details and stats for one file. It provides no further behavioral context, such as what statistics are included or how an invalid or inaccessible file is handled.

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 single sentence is direct, front-loaded, and free of unnecessary wording. It communicates the core result and single-file scope efficiently.

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 one-parameter read, the description, schema, and annotations provide enough information to select and invoke the tool. Because there is no output schema, the vague phrase "details and stats" leaves the returned content unclear, and explicit sibling routing would further improve selection.

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%, and file_id is already well documented, including its length constraints and sources. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that schema, so the high-coverage baseline applies.

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 operation and resource: returning details and statistics for a single file. The single-file scope gives some separation from list_files, but it does not explicitly distinguish the tool from siblings such as list_files or search_files.

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?

Usage is implied: use it when details and stats for one known file are needed. The schema helpfully explains that file_id can come from upload_file or list_files, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternative tools.

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