evidence_get_attachment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Get metadata' clearly indicates a read operation that does not return file content, but it discloses nothing about authentication, error behavior, or response characteristics beyond what the output schema already covers.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the core action and scope, with no filler. It earns its place and leaves the schema to handle details.

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-metadata operation with a complete input schema and an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. It could be more complete by naming the sibling for download or list, but nothing required to call the tool correctly is missing.

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%, and the description adds no parameter-level meaning. The schema already documents evidence and attachment_id as identifiers and id/kod as alternatives, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), object ('metadata'), and resource ('a single attachment of a record'). The qualifier 'metadata' distinguishes it from content-returning siblings like evidence_download_attachment, and 'single' distinguishes it from evidence_list_attachments.

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 purpose implies use when metadata for one attachment is needed, but the description does not explicitly say when to prefer alternatives or when not to use this tool. No sibling routing or exclusion conditions are given.

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