get_file_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'get detailed information' without covering permissions, side effects, return type, or error behavior. It also does not clarify whether the file content is returned or just metadata, leaving the agent uncertain about the operation's outcome.

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 with no redundancy, front-loading the primary action. While it is under-specified in content, it is appropriately sized for the limited information it conveys, earning a high score on conciseness alone.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description must explain what 'detailed information' entails, but it does not. It also lacks guidance on use cases or limitations relative to sibling tools. The tool's moderate complexity (2 parameters) and missing return format make this description incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 has 100% coverage, fully describing both messageId and chatId. The description does not add extra semantics about the parameters, merely implying the file is located via these identifiers. Given the high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the description provides no additional value.

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 the specific verb 'get' and identifies the resource as 'detailed information about a file in a message,' which clearly states the tool's purpose. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like get_media_info, but the phrase 'in a message' narrows the scope enough to indicate a distinct use case.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions. With sibling tools like get_media_info and download_file, the absence of usage direction is a noticeable gap.

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