Get KB Article

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

With no annotations provided, the description alone must convey behavioral traits. It only states that the tool retrieves full content, which implies a read operation but does not disclose error handling, permissions requirements, rate limits, or the exact return format. This is a minimal disclosure.

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 with no filler or redundant information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's core function, making it concise and well-structured.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but thin. It states the function and the return type ('full content'), yet lacks context about usage relative to siblings, error cases, or the structure of the returned article. It is minimally complete but has clear gaps.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with 'The article ID' for the sole parameter. The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter (e.g., format, where to find it, or how it relates to search_kb results), so it meets the baseline for schema-covered parameters.

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 a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('solution article'), making it clear that this tool fetches a single KB article. It implicitly differentiates from search_kb, but does not explicitly state that distinction or mention that it operates by article ID, so it falls slightly short of a 5.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus search_kb or other extraction tools like get_problem. There is no mention of prerequisites, use cases, or alternatives, so the agent receives no usage direction beyond the obvious function.

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