Get Knowledge Base

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, covering the safe-read profile. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as error handling, permissions, or return shape. It does not contradict the annotations, but it also does not go beyond them.

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 seven-word sentence ('Fetch a knowledge base by id.') with zero filler. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 one-parameter, read-only tool with comprehensive annotations and full schema coverage, the description provides sufficient information to select and invoke it correctly. It could mention the return shape or point to lyzr_kb_list for finding IDs, but the simplicity of the operation makes it nearly 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?

The input schema fully describes the only parameter (kb_id: string, 'Knowledge base id'). The description's 'by id' only reinforces the schema without adding new semantic detail. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Fetch' and identifies the resource as 'a knowledge base' accessed 'by id.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like lyzr_kb_list (list all), lyzr_kb_create/update/delete (mutations), and training tools.

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 when the agent knows a specific knowledge base ID, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like lyzr_kb_list for discovering IDs, nor does it mention exclusion cases. Usage is only implied, not directly guided.

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