ora_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states 'retrieve full content' but does not mention side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or whether the operation is destructive. The description is honest but lacks sufficient detail for safe agent decision-making.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by a use case. No superfluous content. It is appropriately sized but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate behavioral notes).

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 single parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description covers the basic purpose and use case. However, it lacks details on the return format, error handling, and scope of 'full content', leaving the agent with incomplete context for using the tool reliably.

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 coverage is 100%, with the 'id' parameter fully described with examples. The description does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline expectation. No additional semantics or constraints are conveyed.

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 verb 'recupere' (retrieve) and resource 'element ORA par son ID', with examples of elements (files, components, folders). It effectively conveys the tool's primary function, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ora_get_rules or ora_get_structure.

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 a use case ('restaurer des fichiers, composants ou dossiers') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. The guidance is implied rather than explicit, leaving some ambiguity.

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