Show Company File Version

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that the tool is an HTTP GET and returns a JSON object, which is minimal behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradictions 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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and free of redundant information. Every sentence serves a clear role: stating the action, usage, and key details (required params and API endpoint).

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 simple read operation with a comprehensive schema and annotations, the description is fairly complete. It includes the API endpoint, required parameters, and the nature of the response. However, it does not explicitly mention the pagination parameters (page, per_page), though they are described in the schema.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, so all parameters have descriptions. The description simply restates that 'company_id' and 'id' are required, which is already indicated in the schema. No additional semantic value is added for any parameter.

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 tool action ('Show detailed information about a File Version') and the resource ('specific Documents by its identifier'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'show_company_file' by specifying that it fetches a file version, not a file. The mention of the API endpoint reinforces the purpose.

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 provides a clear usage context ('Use this to fetch the full details of a specific Documents by its identifier'), but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare it to alternatives such as 'show_company_file' or 'list_company_folders_and_files'. No exclusion or alternative guidance is given.

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