rlm.artifact.get

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as whether the operation is read-only, any required permissions, or potential errors. 'Retrieve' implies a read operation but lacks explicit confirmation.

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 highly concise with only two sentences: one for the purpose and one structured list for parameters. Every sentence serves a clear function without unnecessary words.

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?

Despite an output schema being present, the description is incomplete as it omits usage guidelines, behavioral transparency, and any notes on error handling or prerequisites. For a simple get operation, it is minimally adequate but lacks sufficient context for reliable agent invocation.

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 0%, but the description briefly explains each parameter ('session_id: Session containing artifact' and 'artifact_id: Artifact ID to retrieve'), adding meaning beyond the schema titles. However, it lacks details on format or constraints.

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 uses the specific verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'artifact content', clearly indicating the tool's function. It is easily distinguishable from sibling tools like 'rlm.artifact.list' or 'rlm.artifact.store'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like rlm.artifact.list or rlm.artifact.store. It only states what the tool does, without any conditional or exclusionary context.

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