API-retrieve-a-block

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('Retrieve') without detailing traits like read-only nature, potential rate limits, authentication needs, or what the return includes (e.g., JSON structure, error handling). This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 concise ('Notion | Retrieve a block'), with no wasted words. It's front-loaded and efficient, though it could benefit from slightly more detail to improve clarity without losing brevity.

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's complexity (a retrieval operation with no output schema) and lack of annotations, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what is retrieved (e.g., block content, properties), potential side effects, or error cases. For a tool with no structured output information, more context is needed.

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 has 100% description coverage, with 'block_id' clearly documented as 'Identifier for a Notion block'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states the action ('Retrieve') and resource ('a block'), but it's vague about what retrieval entails—does it fetch metadata, content, or both? It distinguishes from siblings like 'API-delete-a-block' and 'API-update-a-block' by specifying retrieval, but lacks specificity compared to tools like 'API-retrieve-a-page' or 'API-retrieve-a-database'.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For instance, it doesn't clarify if this should be used over 'API-retrieve-a-page' for block-level data or how it relates to 'API-get-block-children'. The description offers no context or exclusions, leaving usage unclear.

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