Get Document Icon

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds the null-return behavior when no icon is set, and clarifies it's a read operation. This is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that says exactly what the tool does and the key edge case. No wasted 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?

With a simple read operation, a rich output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers the essential behavior. The only missing piece is clarity around the optional workspaceId parameter, which slightly reduces completeness.

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 50%: docId is well described, but workspaceId has no description in the schema. The description does not compensate by explaining workspaceId or its role, leaving a significant gap for the agent.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('current sidebar icon of a document'), clearly distinguishing it from write tools like update_doc_icon and from folder icon tools. It also conveys the scope (sidebar icon) precisely.

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 context for when to use this tool is clear: whenever the current sidebar icon of a document is needed. It does not explicitly state exclusions or alternatives, which is why it is not a 5, but the read vs update contrast with sibling tools is implicitly obvious.

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