cosmosdb_read_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns the full item document as JSON and explains key-based vs. DefaultAzureCredential auth. This adds useful behavioral context.

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 concise (4 sentences) with no redundant information. Key points are front-loaded: purpose, requirements, and auth behavior.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers required parameters, auth, and return type. It lacks explicit error handling or 'not found' behavior, but remains sufficient for typical use.

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 0%. The description adds meaning for item_id, partition_key, and key_env_var, but does not describe account, database, or container, which are self-explanatory but still lacking explicit documentation.

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 explicitly states 'Read a single item from a Cosmos DB container by ID and partition key,' which is a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like cosmosdb_delete_item and cosmosdb_query_items.

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 explains that both item_id and partition_key are required and why, and discusses auth behavior via key_env_var. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like cosmosdb_query_items for multiple items.

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