get_record

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds useful behavioral context by disclosing the full payload it returns rather than a summary. The caching/re-read behavior of refresh is described, though only in the schema, not the description.

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 sentences, zero filler, and the core action and its trigger ('once a search has given you a NAID') are front-loaded. The list of returned content is compact rather than 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 carries the return-value burden and does so by enumerating the four content categories. Combined with the annotation-provided safety profile and fully covered parameters, nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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%, so both naid and refresh are fully documented in the schema, including the cache-replacement semantics of refresh. The description only echoes that lookup is by NAID, adding no syntax or format detail beyond structured data, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read one Catalog record in full, by NAID') and enumerates what 'in full' means (scope/content note, hierarchy, holding reference units, page-image URLs). An agent can distinguish this single-record fetch from the sibling search_* tools without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly sequences the tool: 'Use this once a search has given you a NAID worth pursuing,' which ties it to the search_* siblings as the precondition. It gives clear when-to-use context but does not name a specific alternative or state exclusions (e.g. when to prefer browse_children or get_record_images for sub-parts).

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