frappe_get_doc

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

The description implies a safe read operation by stating 'retrieve' and 'returns all fields and values', but it does not explicitly declare it as non-destructive or mention any behavioral traits like permissions or limitations. With no annotations provided, additional transparency about idempotency or data safety would improve score.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, return value, and common use cases. No redundant or unnecessary information. Front-loaded with the core action.

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?

The description covers the basic functionality and return value. However, it does not address whether it retrieves draft or submitted documents, or any access restrictions. For a straightforward read tool, this is mostly complete.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The tool description reiterates the parameters (doctype and name) but does not add substantial new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides via descriptions and examples.

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 explicitly uses the verb 'retrieve' and specifies the resource as 'a single document (doctype record)' by its doctype and name. It provides common use cases like fetching a Sales Invoice, Customer, Item, etc., which clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like frappe_delete_doc or frappe_search_docs.

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 lists common use cases (fetch specific document) but does not explicitly contrast with siblings like frappe_search_docs for bulk retrieval or frappe_create_doc for creation. It implies usage for single document retrieval but lacks guidance on when to avoid this tool.

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