Knowledge Fetch

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds only that the lookup is single-object scoped, and says nothing about behavior on a missing UUID or invalid collection. With annotations carrying the load, this is adequate but thin.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the key qualifiers (single, by UUID, from a collection) are all present and nothing is wasted.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety semantics, the description needn't explain return values. The only real gap is the absence of any note on error/not-found behavior, which is minor for such a simple retrieval tool.

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%, with object_id documented as a Weaviate UUID and collection as a fully enumerated set, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description adds no syntax or format details beyond that, which is the expected baseline.

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?

States a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Fetch a single object by UUID from a knowledge collection.' The 'by UUID' and 'single object' phrasing implicitly distinguishes it from search/query siblings like knowledge_search and knowledge_query, but it never names them or draws the contrast explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'by UUID' suggests the caller already holds the identifier and doesn't need a search. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or named alternative for cases where only a name/filter is known.

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