get_contract_document_file_revision

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get' and provides no details about return format, whether this returns metadata vs. file content, permissions required, or error behavior. This is an under-disclosed read operation.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential operation without wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple get operation.

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?

The description is not complete enough given the lack of annotations, output schema, and the presence of a closely related sibling tool 'download_contract_document_file_revision'. It does not clarify whether this returns revision metadata or file content, nor does it reference the sibling for comparison, leaving an important gap for correct tool selection.

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%, with each parameter having a concise description (Contract ID, Document ID, File revision ID). The tool description adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, which already documents all three parameters clearly.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('a specific file revision for a contract document'). It is specific enough to distinguish from broader operations like listing revisions, though it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling download_contract_document_file_revision.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_contract_document_file_revisions or download_contract_document_file_revision. The intended use is only implied by the action 'Get', with no exclusions or context.

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