get_object

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose the effects of the two flags: metadata=True adds available connections and authenticated=True sends the token for extra fields like 'following'. It says nothing about authentication requirements for the base call, error behavior, or rate limits.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then the flag semantics. No filler, though the key examples take space that could have covered sibling differentiation.

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 no-annotation, no-output-schema fetch tool, the description covers inputs and flag behavior adequately. The remaining gap is the unresolved overlap with get_show/get_user/get_tag, which an agent needs in order to route correctly.

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 description must compensate, and it does explain both boolean flags ('metadata' and 'authenticated') in terms of observable effects. It also illustrates the required 'key' values ('/spartacus/party-time/', '/genres/city:athens/'), covering all three parameters meaningfully.

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 and resource — 'Fetch any object by key or Mixcloud URL' — and enumerates the object types it accepts (show, user, tag, city) with concrete key examples. However, it never distinguishes itself from the more specific siblings get_show, get_user, and get_tag, which appear to overlap heavily.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this generic fetcher versus the specific siblings get_show/get_user/get_tag, nor any prerequisite or exclusion. The key-format examples guide input construction but not tool selection.

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