Get a OneDrive file’s details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint, so safety is covered; the trailing 'Read-only' mostly repeats that. The genuine added value is the disclosure of the returned payload (webViewLink vs webContentLink), which the annotations do not convey. No error, pagination, or permission behavior is described.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, using an em-dash list for the return fields. Every clause carries information; nothing is padded.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully compensates by naming the returned fields, and it covers the single parameter's source. Complete for a simple read tool, though it omits any note on failure modes (e.g., missing/inaccessible fileId) or whether a webUrl-style direct open is guaranteed.

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 100% and there is a single required parameter, so the schema already documents fileId. The description's 'Pass fileId (from list_onedrive_files)' matches the schema wording rather than adding format or constraint detail. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Fetch') plus resource ('one OneDrive item's metadata') with the returned fields enumerated (name, type, size, modified time, webViewLink, webContentLink). The 'OneDrive' qualifier distinguishes it from the sibling get_drive_file, which targets Google Drive.

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 tells the agent where fileId comes from ('from list_onedrive_files'), which implies the natural workflow, but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and does not name alternatives such as get_drive_file or list_onedrive_files as the discovery step.

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