get_share_assets

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavior itself. It only states the action, without mentioning pagination, sorting, permission requirements, or whether the result includes all assets or only direct ones. This leaves the agent without critical context about the tool's 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 a single sentence with zero wasted words. It uses a clean 'verb + object' structure that is immediately scannable.

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 list operation, the description is sparse but functional. It doesn't explain pagination behavior (despite the page/per_page parameters), whether the share must be active, or what fields are returned in each asset. Given no output schema, more detail would improve completeness, but the tool's simplicity keeps this at an adequate level.

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 provides descriptions for all three parameters, covering 100% of them. The description adds no additional parameter semantics; the 'id' description remains generic ('ID of the resource') despite the tool's context, but the schema plus tool name make it understandable.

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 'List' and identifies the resource as 'assets included in a share,' clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_share and list_shares. It is unambiguous about the tool's purpose.

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 no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternative recommendations. However, the purpose is transparent from the name and description, implying this is the tool for retrieving assets within a share, which is adequate for a straightforward read operation.

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