get_knowledge_by_id_api_v1_knowledge

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

The description offers no behavioral details beyond the tool name. Despite being a read operation, it does not confirm safety, authorization requirements, or any side effects. With no annotations, this is insufficient.

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 extremely short but fails to add value beyond the tool name. It is under-specification, not concise. Every sentence should earn its place, and this one does not.

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 and the tool's relative simplicity, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value or the scope of the knowledge object, and it lacks differentiation from similar tools in the large sibling list.

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 single parameter 'id' lacks any description; the schema has 0% coverage. The description does not clarify what the ID represents (e.g., knowledge base ID vs file ID), leaving the agent without necessary context.

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 'Get Knowledge By Id' is a tautology of the tool name and does not specify what 'knowledge' refers to (e.g., knowledge base, file, or entry). It fails to distinguish this retrieval operation from sibling tools like 'get_knowledge_bases' or 'get_knowledge_files_by_id'.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple knowledge retrieval tools (e.g., search, list, get files), the agent has no criteria for selection.

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