Show RFI In PDF Format

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

The description adds context beyond annotations by stating the return format includes file contents or download URL. It also mentions the endpoint and API section. No contradictions with annotations (readOnly, idempotent).

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 4 sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Some repetition exists (e.g., 'full details' mentioned twice), but overall 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?

Given 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but does not explain optional parameters or their effects on PDF output. Missing details on pagination and error scenarios.

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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats required parameters but adds no new meaning beyond the schema. Optional parameters like page and per_page are not mentioned.

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 verb 'return', the resource 'RFI', and the output format 'PDF'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'show_rfi' by emphasizing the PDF aspect.

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 explicitly recommends using this to fetch full details of a specific RFI, providing clear context. However, it does not mention when not to use it or alternatives, though the sibling context implies a JSON alternative.

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