get_properties

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

With no annotations, the description correctly indicates a read operation ('Get'). It does not mention any side effects, permissions, or auth needs, but for a simple read tool, the behavior is sufficiently transparent. No contradiction with annotations.

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, efficiently conveying the purpose with no redundant words. The verb is front-loaded, making it immediately clear what the tool does.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, read operation) and the presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the tool retrieves without needing additional detail.

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 tool has zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add parameter details, but none are needed. Baseline score of 4 for no parameters is appropriate.

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' and the resource 'core document properties', and lists specific examples (title, creator, subject, dates, revision). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_comments or get_document_info.

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 for retrieving core properties but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives, such as get_document_info which might return different metadata. No exclusions or context are given.

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