Get knowledge base item

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

Annotations already declare the full safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), and the description adds nothing on top of that — no mention of error behavior for missing IDs, no note that permissions/visibility may restrict results. It essentially restates the title.

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 zero filler, which is appropriate for a simple getter. It is terse rather than padded, though it leans toward under-specification rather than optimal density.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and all three parameters are fully documented in the schema. What is missing is the surrounding context an agent needs to choose this tool confidently — no routing against the list sibling and no failure-mode note. Adequate but with a clear gap.

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 descriptions of knowbaseId, fields, and format already carry the meaning; baseline 3 applies. The tool description itself adds no further parameter nuance (e.g., default field set behavior or when markdown output is preferable).

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 ('Retrieve') and resource ('knowledge base article') plus the lookup key ('by ID'), so the operation is unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish itself from sibling glpi_list_knowbase_items or the create/update/delete variants beyond the obvious verb.

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 only implied guidance is that you need an ID. There is no statement of when to pick this over glpi_list_knowbase_items, no note on what happens with an unknown/out-of-range ID, and no prerequisites or exclusions.

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