Api managed documents retrieve

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior. The description adds that unauthorized related fields are masked, which is useful auth-dependent output context beyond the annotations. No contradiction is present, though permission details remain unstated.

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?

It is one short sentence with no filler, and the masking caveat is front-loaded. However, its brevity contributes to under-specification rather than to clarity.

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?

For a simple retrieve-by-id tool, the description still omits the resource name and the meaning of id, and gives no usage context. Annotations cover safety, but the definition is not complete enough to call correctly without relying on the tool name.

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% and the only parameter is an undocumented id string. The description never says the id identifies a managed document or explains accepted format or scope, so it adds no parameter meaning.

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 says 'Return a single object' but never identifies the resource as a managed document; that purpose is only inferable from the tool name/title. It is vague and does not distinguish this tool from sibling retrieve/list tools.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus managed_documents_list, managed_documents_object_retrieve, or other retrieve variants. The agent receives no routing guidance or prerequisites.

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