get_passage

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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry behavioral weight. It usefully discloses that the identifier is opaque and that retrieval is for exactly one passage, which signals a direct lookup rather than search. However, it does not mention behavior on missing/invalid IDs, auth requirements, or read-only guarantees.

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, tightly written sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then gives the essential provenance of the identifier.

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 one-parameter get-by-id tool with an output schema available, the description provides the necessary context: what to retrieve and exactly where the identifier comes from. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and call it correctly.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates well for the single parameter passage_id by explaining that it is an opaque identifier returned by search_standards. This adds semantics beyond the schema's bare string type.

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 states a specific verb ('Retrieve'), a clear resource ('one exact passage'), and a precise identifier source ('opaque identifier returned by search_standards'). This distinguishes it from get_document (document-level) and search_standards (search operation) without needing to open schemas.

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 clearly implies usage after search_standards, since the passage_id is produced by that tool. It does not explicitly discuss when to prefer get_document, but the passage vs. document distinction is reasonably evident from the wording.

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