get_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full transparency burden. It portrays a simple retrieval, but omits that max_chars can truncate the document, and does not describe read-only nature or any side effects. This is a gap.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded with key information. It could be slightly more structured, but it is 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?

For a tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain truncation behavior, return format, or provide guidance relative to siblings like get_section. It adequately covers basic purpose but leaves gaps.

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% with detailed descriptions for all parameters. The description adds little beyond schema, only noting usefulness for long docs. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema handles semantic load.

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 'Retrieve a full documentation file by id or title', specifying the verb (retrieve) and resource (documentation file). It differentiates from siblings like get_section (partial) and list_docs (listing), so purpose is clear.

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 mentions it is 'useful for longer implementation guides and runbooks', providing context for when to use it. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives like get_section for shorter content, so it lacks exclusions.

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