Get memo

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and non-openWorld, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds return-content context (metadata fields, linked items, comments) but no additional behavioral detail such as access requirements or behavior on missing/unauthorized memo ids.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that opens with the core action ('Read one memo in full') before enumerating returns. No redundant or filler text.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned content, and annotations cover safety. The main gap is the undocumented include_comments parameter, otherwise the definition is adequate for a simple read tool.

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 only 50%: the required 'memo' param is documented in the schema, but 'include_comments' has no description anywhere. The description's mention of 'comments' loosely hints at it but never explains the flag's name, default, or effect, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Read one memo in full') and enumerates exactly what is returned (Markdown content, metadata, attachments, linked memos, comments). The 'one memo' phrasing implicitly separates it from search_memos, but does not name or contrast with the sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: fetching the full detail of a single known memo. There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus search_memos (to find memos) or get_overview, nor any listed preconditions.

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