get_asset

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

No annotations are provided, and the description is merely 'Retrieve an asset,' which conveys no behavioral details beyond the verb. It fails to disclose outcome characteristics like read-only nature, error conditions (e.g., missing asset), or side effects, leaving agents uninformed.

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?

The description is extremely concise at four words, which is efficient but comes at the cost of useful content. It is front-loaded with the core action, but lacks structure to convey necessary details, making it minimally adequate.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, plus three required parameters, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the return value, potential errors, or how to obtain assetId. Sibling tools like list_assets are available but not mentioned for context.

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?

Although schema coverage for parameters is 67% (spaceId and environmentId have descriptions), the tool description adds no additional meaning. assetId lacks a description in both schema and description, leaving its format or source ambiguous.

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 'Retrieve an asset' clearly specifies the action (retrieve) and resource (asset), indicating a read operation. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like get_entry or get_content_type, which have similar purposes for different resource types. A more specific phrasing could improve clarity.

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 description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_assets or search_entries. It does not mention prerequisites, such as needing the asset ID, or exclusions. Without context, an agent may misuse the tool.

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