get-asset

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It correctly reveals that the tool returns a temporary signed URL, which is a key behavioral trait. However, it does not specify the expiration duration, permission requirements, or error behavior, leaving some transparency gaps.

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?

A single sentence that is direct and front-loaded, stating the core action and key qualifier ('temporary signed URL') without any unnecessary words. It earns its place fully.

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 tool has one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description adequately conveys the purpose and return type. It could optionally mention expiration details or error handling, but for a simple tool it is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 input schema already describes 'assetId' as 'The ID of the asset to retrieve', and the description repeats this without adding new details. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description adds minimal semantic value beyond what is already structured.

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 identifies the verb ('Get'), the resource ('asset'), and the specific output ('temporary signed URL'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on bookmarks, lists, and tags. No other tool handles assets, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool (downloading an asset by ID) and implicitly that it returns a URL rather than the asset content. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, although the lack of sibling asset tools makes the usage obvious.

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