get_subtotal_position

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

The annotations already declare the operation as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as the structure of the returned position, error conditions, or document-type handling. It simply restates the fetch action without disclosing any traits 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?

The description is a single, direct sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. It front-loads the action and object, making it easy 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?

Despite the concise description, the tool's purpose is reasonably inferable from the name and schema. However, the description lacks any exposition about return values or the relationship between the three required parameters beyond what the schema already provides. With no output schema, a bit more context about what a subtotal position represents would improve completeness.

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?

All three parameters (kb_document_type, document_id, position_id) are fully described in the schema with examples and domain-specific notes. The description itself adds no parameter-level details, but since the schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 the specific verb 'Fetch' with the resource 'a subtotal position', clearly identifying the operation as a read of a single subtotal position. It distinguishes itself from list_subtotal_positions by singular scope, but does not explicitly contrast with other position getters like get_subposition, leaving some ambiguity about the exact entity type.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_subtotal_positions or get_item_position. There are no usage contexts, exclusions, or references to related tools, leaving the agent to infer applicability solely from the name.

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