get_article

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must reveal behavioral context. It only states the operation, not details like error handling, required permissions, or the shape of the returned article. This is a minimal transparency disclosure.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous information. It is concise and directly states the action.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity—one parameter, no output schema, no nested objects—the description covers the essential purpose. It doesn't elaborate on return format, but the lack of an output schema reduces the need for that detail. However, a brief note about possible 'not found' behavior would have improved 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?

The schema has one required integer 'id' with no description. The description mentions 'by ID', which provides the meaning of the parameter and connects it to the operation. Since there is only one simple parameter, this is adequate.

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 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'Knowledge Base Article' and the access path 'by ID'. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like list_articles, create_article, and update_article.

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 the tool is for retrieving a single article when the ID is known, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over list_articles or provide exclusion criteria. The context is implied by the wording.

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