get_item

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get' without specifying whether it's read-only, what happens if the item is not found, whether it requires authentication, or how the response is formatted (though some is in schema). Minimal transparency beyond the basic operation.

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?

Single concise sentence with no redundant words. Front-loads the action and resource. Perfectly sized for the information it conveys.

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 relative simplicity, an output schema exists, and parameter descriptions are complete, the description is adequate but not rich. It lacks guidance on when to prefer this over search_items or how optional parameters like sign_assets operate, though schema covers mechanics. Somewhat complete but not fully contextual.

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%, so the schema documents all 5 parameters. The description adds no extra meaning beyond naming the two required parameters (collection and item ID). Baseline 3 is appropriate; no additional semantic value provided.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('specific STAC Item'), and the key identifiers ('collection and item ID'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_items (search) and get_collection (collection-level), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 when to use it: when you have a known collection ID and item ID. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the word 'specific' and inclusion of both IDs clearly contextualize direct retrieval versus search. No misleading guidance.

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