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 only states the action ('Get') with no mention of authorization needs, rate limits, or potential side effects. While a read operation is implied, no behavioral traits are disclosed.

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 very short (one sentence), which is concise but lacks beneficial elaboration. It earns its place but could be expanded slightly without losing conciseness (e.g., adding context for the id).

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 large number of sibling tools (including other get tools and list_documents), the description is too minimal to fully guide an agent. An output schema exists but its content is not visible; the description does not hint at the return structure. More context would improve usability.

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%, and the description adds minimal meaning beyond 'by id.' It does not explain what the document_id represents, how to obtain it, or any constraints (e.g., data type or format). This forces the agent to infer from context.

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 clearly states 'Get a single document by id.' It uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('document'), and is distinct from sibling tools like list_documents. However, it does not differentiate itself from other get tools like get_work_package or get_time_entry, which follow a similar pattern.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Given the many sibling tools for fetching single resources (e.g., get_work_package, get_status), the description should provide context, such as 'Use when you have a document ID from list_documents' or 'Use to retrieve document metadata.'

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