zotero_get_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description is the only source of behavioral info. It explains that child notes and attachments can be included via include_children, indicating the return scope. However, it does not disclose read-only nature, error behavior, or other side effects, which limits comprehensiveness.

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 highly concise: one sentence for the main purpose and two short lines for parameters. Every word earns its place, and the core purpose is front-loaded, making it easy to scan.

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 presence of an output schema, the description appropriately focuses on purpose and parameters. It covers the essentials for a simple fetch tool but lacks alternative guidance or prerequisite notes (e.g., the need for a valid item_key). Overall, it is nearly complete for its complexity.

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 description fully explains both parameters: item_key's format ('8-character Zotero item key') and include_children's effect ('Also return child notes and attachments'). Since schema descriptions are absent, this completely compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 a specific action ('Fetch one reference in full') and specifies the scope (including notes and attachments), which distinguishes it from related tools like zotero_search or zotero_get_fulltext. The verb and resource are unambiguous.

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 use for retrieving a single item by key, but it does not explicitly discuss alternatives (e.g., zotero_search) or when not to use this tool. The context is clear from 'one reference', but there is no exclusion or comparison guidance.

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