gateway_knowledge_document_get

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

The description aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation by characterizing the action as 'Read', and adds that documents are markdown and located in personal/group knowledge spaces. However, it does not disclose behavior like access requirements, error conditions, or return format, though the output schema may cover some of this.

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 sentence with no extraneous words, front-loading the core action. It is 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?

Given the low schema parameter coverage and lack of parameter explanations, the description is incomplete for an agent intending to call the tool correctly. The output schema may help, but the description doesn't address the required 'document' parameter or the optional 'space' parameter.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the description does not define the 'space' or 'document' parameters. 'personal or group knowledge space' only vaguely hints at the space param, and 'document' is not described at all, so the agent gets no additional parameter semantics.

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 ('markdown document'), and clarifies the location ('personal or group knowledge space'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like gateway_knowledge_document_search or gateway_knowledge_document_put.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search or list. It does not state prerequisites, exclusions, or scenarios favoring this tool, leaving selection entirely to the agent's inference.

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