get_document

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the ambiguous fragment 'download links', which is too vague to clarify whether links are fetched, resolved, or returned in the response — no 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?

It is a single short sentence with no waste, which is appropriate sizing, but the garbled construction 'Read a Morning document and download links' is both compact and unclear, so brevity here does not translate into clarity.

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?

For a read tool with one required, undescribed parameter and no output schema, the description should clarify what is returned (document content, download links, metadata). Instead it leaves both the input semantics and the return behavior undefined, so an agent cannot confidently invoke it.

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?

The single parameter 'id' has 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not explain what the id refers to (document UUID vs slug) or its expected format. The UUID pattern exists only in the schema, so the description leaves the required parameter semantically unexplained.

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 verb ('Read') and a resource ('a Morning document'), which is better than a tautology, but the trailing phrase 'and download links' is ambiguous — it is unclear whether the tool downloads links or returns them. It also fails to distinguish the tool from siblings like get_document_draft, search_documents, or document_options.

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?

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus get_document_draft, search_documents, or document_options. No prerequisites, no exclusions, and no context about what constitutes a 'Morning document' versus a draft.

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