feishu_fetch_doc

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool returns document title and Markdown format content with pagination support, which covers basic output behavior. However, it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like authentication requirements, rate limits, error conditions, whether it's read-only or has side effects, or what happens with invalid doc_id formats. The description is functional but lacks comprehensive behavioral context.

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 concise at just two sentences that directly state the tool's purpose and key capability. Every word earns its place: the first sentence covers what the tool does and what it returns, the second sentence adds the important pagination feature. No wasted words or redundant information.

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 tool has 3 parameters with 100% schema coverage but no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate but minimal context. It covers the basic purpose and pagination feature but doesn't address authentication, error handling, or detailed output format beyond 'Markdown格式内容'. For a document retrieval tool with no output schema, more detail about the return structure would be helpful.

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 the schema already fully documents all three parameters (doc_id, offset, limit) with their descriptions, types, and constraints. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the parameter documentation work.

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 fetches Feishu cloud document content and returns title and Markdown format, with specific mention of pagination support for large documents. It distinguishes from siblings like feishu_create_doc and feishu_update_doc by focusing on retrieval rather than creation/modification. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from docxGetRawContent which might have overlapping functionality.

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 implies usage context through '支持分页获取大文档' (supports pagination for large documents), suggesting this tool should be used when dealing with large documents that need pagination. However, it doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like docxGetRawContent or feishu_search_doc_wiki, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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