artifact_get

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states 'Read' implying non-destructive, but fails to disclose error handling (e.g., what happens if id not found), permissions requirements, or return format. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the obvious.

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?

Single sentence with no wasted words. It's efficiently worded but lacks any structural elements like bullet points or sections. For a simple tool, this is acceptable but could benefit from slightly more detail in a structured format.

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 read tool with no output schema, the description should explain what data is returned or reliability traits. It does not address error cases, response structure, or permissions. Given the tool's simplicity, the description is insufficiently complete.

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%. The description mentions 'by id' but does not explain the 'id' parameter's format, source, or semantics. The schema only provides a type and minLength constraint. The description adds no meaningful parameter guidance beyond stating the parameter's purpose.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'read' and resource 'artifact' with a specific filter criterion 'by id'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like artifact_list (multiple artifacts) and artifact_update (modify). However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with other 'get' tools for different resources (e.g., item_get, note_get).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like artifact_list or artifact_add. The description implies use when you have an artifact id, but it's not explicit about when not to use it or what prerequisites are needed.

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