get_questionnaire_document

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden. 'Retrieve' clearly signals a read-only operation, and the availability caveat about the active Headquarters build is useful. However, the description does not disclose what happens when the build does not expose the document, such as errors or fallback behavior.

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 concise and front-loaded with the action and resource. The conditional clause is a bit roundabout, but there is no redundant content or inflated length.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is incomplete. It does not specify what metadata is returned, how to handle the undocumented profile parameter, or what to do when the Headquarters build does not expose the document.

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 documents questionnaire_identity with a GUID$Version format, but the profile parameter has no schema description and the tool description adds no parameter-level meaning. With 50% schema description coverage, the description should compensate for the undocumented 'profile' parameter but does not.

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 names a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('questionnaire document/design metadata'), so the core purpose is clear. However, it does not contrast this with sibling tools like get_questionnaire or compare_questionnaire_version_schemas, leaving some potential for confusion.

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 is given about when to use this tool instead of alternatives. The phrase 'where the active Headquarters build exposes it' hints at a precondition, but it does not explain how to verify availability or which sibling tool to fall back on.

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