get_object

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions returning a screenshot, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, side effects, permissions, or limitations. The description implicitly suggests read-only but is not fully transparent.

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 concise (3 lines), front-loads the purpose, and includes structured Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary words.

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 tool's simplicity (2 required string params), the description sufficiently explains the return value (object and screenshot). With an output schema present, the description does not need to elaborate on return format further.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds value by providing brief explanations for both parameters (doc_name: 'name of the document', obj_name: 'name of the object'). While not overly detailed, it compensates for the schema gap.

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 clearly states 'Get an object from a document' with a specific verb and resource. It explains the purpose ('to see what you can check or edit') and distinguishes it from siblings like get_objects (plural) and create/delete/edit tools.

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 implies usage for inspection ('to see what you can check or edit'), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives. Context signals and sibling list provide context, but the description lacks explicit guidance.

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