docx.sdt_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get SDT content', providing no information on return format, error handling, side effects, or even explicit confirmation that the operation is read-only. It adds no value beyond what the tool's name already implies.

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 short sentence, which is concise in length but not in a useful way. It lacks necessary information such as the purpose of the identifiers or expected outcomes. It is under-specified rather than efficiently concise, and the sentence does not earn its place by adding context beyond the tool name.

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 low complexity (2 simple parameters, no output schema), a brief description might be acceptable, but this one is too bare. It does not explain what 'SDT content' means, how to specify the tagOrAlias, or what the agent should do with the result. An agent cannot fully determine call correctness or interpret responses from this description alone.

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?

The input schema provides 100% description coverage for both parameters (docId: 'Document ID', tagOrAlias: 'SDT tag or alias'). The description adds no additional meaning or format details for these parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already documents them adequately.

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 'Get SDT content' states a specific verb (get) and resource (SDT content), making the tool's purpose clear. The name 'docx.sdt_get' and the sibling 'docx.sdt_put' provide implicit distinction between reading and writing, though the description itself does not explicitly mention this differentiation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like docx.sdt_put or other read tools (e.g., docx.get_text). No mention of prerequisites (e.g., document must be open) or conditions for use. The description offers no context for choosing this tool over siblings.

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