Get Document

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is clear. The description adds behavioral nuance about the include_content option and its performance implication (loading the full text), which is not in the annotations or schema.

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?

Two sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second gives a specific usage tip. No unnecessary words, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 is simple with 3 parameters and an output schema. The description covers the main behavior and the optional content parameter; annotations handle safety. It doesn't mention response_format, but the schema's enum provides that information.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining include_content's effect ('to get just the metadata without loading the full text'). doc_id is inferable from the tool name, and response_format has enum values, so the description adds meaningful value for the key boolean parameter.

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 uses the specific verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'document's metadata and optionally its text content', clearly distinguishing it from tools like vault_list_docs or vault_search. It clearly states the tool's primary function.

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?

It provides clear context that this tool retrieves a single document and gives explicit advice on when to set include_content=false to avoid loading the full text. It doesn't name alternative tools or exclusions, but the context is understandable without them.

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