sk_dp_get_guideline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavior. It only states the operation is 'Get', implying a safe read, but does not mention potential errors (e.g., ID not found), return format, permissions, rate limits, or any side effects. This is minimal behavioral transparency.

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 sentence, immediately states the action and the key qualifier, and contains no filler or redundancy. It is optimally concise and front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and a clear schema, but there is no output schema and no annotations. The description does not mention return value, error behavior, or any requirements, leaving some contextual gaps. It is minimally viable but not fully complete.

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 the description merely restates the ID parameter as 'database ID', adding no meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The baseline of 3 applies because the schema handles parameter semantics effectively.

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+resource ('Get a specific ÚOOÚ SR guidance document') and identifies the exact scope ('by its database ID'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like sk_dp_search_guidelines (search) and sk_dp_get_decision (get decision).

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 usage is for retrieving a known guidance document by ID, and the schema hints that IDs come from sk_dp_search_guidelines results. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives nor include any exclusions, leaving usage guidance implied rather than explicit.

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