get_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the return is a JSON string with document details including content, but doesn't disclose potential errors, permissions, or whether the document content is fully returned or truncated. For a read operation, this is a moderate gap.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. The Args/Returns structure is clear and wastes no words. It could be slightly more informative, but it is appropriately sized.

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?

The tool has one required parameter and an output schema, so the description doesn't need to explain return structure in detail. It covers the basic call pattern. However, it doesn't mention error cases or any prerequisites, which for a simple get-by-ID tool is a minor gap.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain that document_id is the document ID, which adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's type and title. It doesn't clarify the ID format or source, but for a simple integer ID this is adequate.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('a specific document by ID'), which clearly distinguishes it from list_documents and search_documents. It doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the resource and ID-based retrieval are clear enough.

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 implies usage: call this when you have a document ID and need a single document's details. It doesn't explicitly state when to use list_documents or search_documents instead, but the ID-based nature is a clear contextual signal.

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