Workspace Get File

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is communicated. The description adds only the fields retrieved, saying nothing about permission requirements, behavior for invalid/missing inode IDs, or whether invisible files are returned. With annotations carrying safety, this is adequate but thin.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the returned-field list and lookup key packed in without filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 single-parameter read with annotations and an output schema, the description covers what is fetched and how it is addressed. Missing only edge-case behavior (not found, permissions), which is a minor gap given the output schema already defines the return shape.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the single untyped 'inode_id' string parameter gets its meaning entirely from the description's 'by its inode ID' phrase, which confirms the identifier role. However, no format, example, or sourcing hint is given, leaving the only parameter minimally documented.

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 ('Get') and resource ('a file's details') plus the identifying key ('inode ID'), and enumerates returned fields (type, name, path, owner). An agent can distinguish it from workspace_list_files or workspace_update_file without opening a schema, though no sibling is named 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?

The phrase 'by its inode ID' implies the caller must already possess an inode ID (presumably from workspace_list_files), but the description never says when to use this versus listing/searching, nor what to do if the inode is unknown. No alternatives or exclusions are offered.

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