get_doc

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the operation is known to be safe. The description adds valuable context beyond the annotation by clarifying what the tool returns (metadata only) and its limitation regarding comment threads. This gives the agent a fuller behavioral picture without conflicting with annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: it leads with the main purpose, then provides usage guidance, then a limitation, then parameter detail. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or filler content.

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 single-parameter read-only tool, this description is complete. It covers purpose, usage context, limitations, and parameter semantics. The output schema exists, so return values don't need to be spelled out. The available annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint) further round out the safety profile.

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?

The schema provides no description for doc_id (0% coverage), so the description's 'Args' section is essential. It explains that doc_id is 'The Doc's ID, as returned by create_doc,' giving the parameter context and origin. This meaningfully compensates for the schema gap, though a concrete example of the ID format would have made it even stronger.

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's purpose: 'Get a Doc's metadata — name, parent location, visibility.' It specifies a concrete verb and resource, and lists the exact fields returned. It also distinguishes itself from get_doc_page/get_doc_pages by explicitly noting those are for page content, providing clear sibling differentiation.

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 directs users to use get_doc_page or get_doc_pages for reading page content, giving clear alternatives. It also notes a limitation (no Doc-comment endpoint in ClickUp's public API), which helps the agent decide when this tool is not appropriate.

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