Get Object

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral detail, the 'up to 10 images' cap, but says nothing about permissions, error behavior, or pagination beyond that, and return-shape detail is largely redundant given an output schema exists.

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?

One tight sentence, front-loaded with what is returned, no filler. Every clause names content the caller will receive.

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?

With one required parameter fully documented, an output schema, and annotations covering safety, the definition is nearly complete for a single-record lookup. It could add one clause on when to prefer this over search_objects, but nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single object_id parameter, including the accepted record-id format, so the schema carries the burden. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what is already documented.

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?

States a specific resource and scope: the full record of one object, enumerated by content type (description, notes, materials, topics, rights, images, web_url). The singular 'one object' implicitly contrasts with search_objects/list results, but no sibling is named, so it stops short of explicit differentiation.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance or named alternatives. Usage is only implied through the schema's note that object_id comes from search_objects or explore_topic results, which suggests the lookup-after-search workflow but is not stated in the description itself.

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