Get an ECFS filing by ID

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Fetch' implies a read-only operation and the ID parameter is clear, but there is no disclosure of response shape, error behavior, idempotency, or what happens when a filing is not found.

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 no filler; every word earns its place and the core action is stated first.

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?

For a one-parameter fetch tool the definition is nearly sufficient, but with no output schema and no annotations it does not explain what the returned filing contains or how failures are signaled, leaving a small but real gap for an agent.

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 coverage is 100% and id_submission is already documented as 'The ECFS submission ID of the filing to fetch.' The description's reference to submission ID adds no meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Fetch'), names the resource ('ECFS filing'), and scopes it to a single item retrieved by submission ID. It is distinguishable from sibling search tools, though it does not explicitly name the alternative or contrast with ecfs_search_filings.

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 the tool is for retrieving exactly one filing when the submission ID is known, but it does not state when to prefer it over ecfs_search_filings or other siblings, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites beyond the required ID.

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