get_asset

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'Get full details' but does not describe what 'full details' includes, any authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. The behavior is simple (read operation) so the gap is moderate.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the purpose and key detail (File_ID). No redundant words or information.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is sufficient to understand the tool's purpose and usage. It lacks specifics about the return structure, but 'full details' is an acceptable abstraction for 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% for the single parameter 'id', and the schema already describes it as 'The asset's File_ID'. The description adds an example ('e.g. 20260622_01471'), which is helpful but not essential. Baseline is 3.

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 clearly states the action ('Get'), resource ('full details for one asset'), and the key identifier (Stockflow File_ID). It distinguishes from siblings like download_preview, get_categories, and search_assets by focusing on retrieving all details of a single asset by its unique ID.

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 usage when you have a specific File_ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search_assets for finding assets, download_preview for a preview). No when-not-to-use or prerequisite conditions are provided.

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