documents_children

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It indicates a read operation via 'Get', but does not disclose important behavioral traits such as whether the traversal is recursive, the return format, pagination, or performance implications. Minimal context beyond the core action.

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, focused sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the action and resource, making it immediately scannable and efficient.

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?

Although the tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), the description leaves ambiguity about what 'nested child document structure' entails. It does not clarify whether all descendants are returned, the shape of the structure, or how to interpret the response. This is a meaningful gap given the absence of an output schema.

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%: the single 'id' parameter is described as 'Parent document ID'. The description itself adds no additional parameter semantics, so it neither improves nor detracts from what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies a clear resource ('nested child document structure of a document'). It is unambiguous and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like documents_list and documents_info, which handle listing and metadata retrieval.

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 implies when to use the tool (when you need the hierarchical child structure of a document), but it does not explicitly state exclusions or contrast with alternatives like documents_info. No direct guidance on when not to use this tool is provided.

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