Show Drawing Revision

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

Annotations already cover safety profile (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint). Description adds that it returns a JSON object and includes API path info, which is marginal beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences with front-loaded purpose. Includes some extra info like API endpoint and category, but still relatively concise. Could be more streamlined by removing redundant 'Required parameters' statement.

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?

Describes return as a JSON object with full details, which is adequate for a read tool. However, the 'page' and 'per_page' parameters in the schema are not explained (unexpected for a single-resource endpoint), creating a minor gap. Output schema would help, but is not present.

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%, so parameters are well-documented. Description repeats required parameters but adds no additional meaning or context beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it returns a specific Drawing Revision (verb+resource). Distinguishes from sibling tools like list_drawing_revisions (list vs show) and update_drawing_revision (update vs show). The wording is slightly off (plural 'Drawings') but does not obscure 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?

Explicitly says to use it to fetch full details of a specific drawing revision by identifier. Provides clear context for use, but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives like list_drawing_revisions.

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