get_bookmark

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get a specific bookmark by ID' without mentioning error handling, whether the bookmark is returned regardless of status, permissions required, or any side effects. It lacks transparency about the tool's behavior beyond the trivial fact that it gets a bookmark.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key information. It contains no redundant text and every word earns its place for this simple tool.

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 simple read-by-ID tool with only one parameter, the description is minimally sufficient. However, given the presence of sibling tools like get_bookmarks, search_bookmarks, and check_bookmark, it lacks context about when this singular fetch is the right choice. The output schema likely explains return values, but the description does not help an agent disambiguate from related operations.

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 schema already covers the parameter fully: bookmark_id with description 'ID of the bookmark to retrieve.' The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond what the schema states, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get a specific bookmark by ID' clearly states the verb (get), the resource (bookmark), and the scope (specific by ID). It distinguishes from siblings like get_bookmarks (plural, likely listing) and search_bookmarks (query-based) by emphasizing singularity and direct ID access.

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?

Usage is implied: use when you have a specific bookmark ID and want that record. However, no explicit alternatives or exclusions are provided, and the description does not clarify when to prefer this over get_bookmarks or check_bookmark despite having many sibling tools.

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