get_space_diagram

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds valuable behavior beyond annotations: API key requirement in the server environment, 401/403 and 404 error conditions, case-insensitive title matching, and the returned JSON shape.

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 dense passage with no waste, front-loading the core action, lookup modes, return shape, auth, and error behavior. Every sentence carries operational 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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by naming the returned JSON fields. It also covers authentication, error cases, matching behavior, and where to look when nothing matches.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema: title matching is case-insensitive, and it frames lookup as by id or by title in a folder. It could have tied `space_id` more explicitly to the API key, but it is still helpful.

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 and resource: "Read a diagram from a Diagrammo Cloud space, by `id` or by `title` in `folder`." It clearly distinguishes this lookup tool from write-oriented siblings such as put_space_diagram and from discovery via list_space_diagrams.

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?

It gives clear selection logic between `id` and `title` and points to list_space_diagrams when the caller does not know what exists. It does not explicitly spell out when-not-to-use this tool, but the retrieval context is clear.

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