regulations_get_docket

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), the description discloses API key requirements and rate limits, behavior on bad IDs (invalid_input, 0 fetch), nonexistent IDs (not_found), and the possibility of null RIN. It also explains the return structure and meta fields. No contradiction with annotations.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and includes organized sections (HONESTY, error handling). It is fairly long but all details are relevant. Could be slightly trimmed 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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description thoroughly covers return fields, error cases, authentication, and cross-tool join context. It leaves no major gaps in understanding what the tool does and how to interpret results.

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 a detailed description for docketId. The tool description adds an example and validation info, but this is marginal additional value beyond the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Fetch' and the resource 'ONE Regulations.gov docket by id', specifying the endpoint '/v4/dockets/{docketId}'. It highlights that the detail view contains the 'rin' field. This differentiates it from sibling tools like regulations_search_dockets which would be used for searching or listing dockets.

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 explains the tool's purpose for fetching a single docket and provides cross-source join context for 'rin'. It mentions API key rate limits and error handling. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like regulations_search_dockets.

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