Get targeted brief

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral details: the call fails rather than guessing on no/multiple matches, and includeMarkdown optionally returns rendered Markdown. This goes beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core action and context, the second covers the optional parameter and failure behavior. Every clause earns its place.

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 read-only tool with 2 parameters, full schema coverage, and annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, usage, and failure mode. It does not detail the response structure, but 'in full' and 'parsed record' provide sufficient context. A 5 would require more explicit return format details.

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 100%, and the parameter descriptions already cover the meaning of id (record ID or stored filename stem) and includeMarkdown (true returns Markdown). The tool description simply restates this information, adding no new semantic value beyond the schema.

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 ('Read') and resource ('targeted brief') with identifying criteria ('by record ID or stored filename stem'). It also distinguishes from list_briefs by noting it is used after list_briefs narrows candidates, giving clear workflow context.

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?

Explicitly states the usual sequence ('after list_briefs narrows the candidates') and when to set includeMarkdown. However, it does not name alternatives (e.g., get_brief) or state when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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