get_asset_by_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must stand alone. It only restates the action without disclosing behavior like error handling, authentication, rate limits, or what happens when the asset is not found. The description adds little beyond the tool's name.

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, with a clear front-loaded purpose statement and an Args section. It contains no filler, making every sentence useful and easy to scan.

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 simple get-by-id tool with an output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It does not mention error cases, prerequisites, or special behavior, but the operation is straightforward and the output schema covers return values. However, given the lack of annotations, it is adequate but not rich.

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 description explains the parameter—'display_id: The asset display ID.'—which provides minimal context beyond the schema's type and title. Since the schema has no description, this is the only source of parameter meaning, but it doesn't clarify what a 'display ID' is or whether it is unique.

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 the function with a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('single asset'), and identifies the key parameter (display ID). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_assets (list) and search_assets by focusing on a single asset lookup.

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 implies usage via the name and phrase 'Retrieve a single asset by its display ID,' but does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives such as search_assets or filter_assets. There are no exclusions, scenarios, or comparisons with siblings.

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