get_annotation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: it returns both original and marked images, and flags the comment field as untrusted user content, which is an important injection warning for the agent.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler; the payload is front-loaded and the security caveat is placed after the main description.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-shape explanation is not required, and annotations cover the read-only profile. However, with 0% parameter documentation and no error/precondition note for an unresolvable annotationId, the definition is only adequate.

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% for two required parameters, so the description must compensate. It does not explain what projectPath should point to or what form an annotationId takes (prefix, UUID, integer), leaving both opaque.

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?

Specific verb ('Return') plus concrete resources: annotation context, comment, and original/marked PNG images. An agent can tell it retrieves one annotation's payload, though it never contrasts itself with list_annotations or get_annotation_status.

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 statement of when to call this versus list_annotations, get_annotation_status, or resolve_annotation, and no preconditions (e.g. whether the annotation addon must be enabled). The only guidance is a content-trust warning, which does not help select the tool.

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