Get an example document of one kind

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, but the description adds substantive traits beyond them: static/local behavior, sub-1KB size, byte-identical output on every call, guaranteed validity against `validate_document`, and the failure mode where an unknown kind returns an error naming `list_kinds`.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then the routing rule, then the behavioral guarantees and error case. Every clause carries distinct information; nothing is restated from the schema or annotations.

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 an output schema present, return values need no explanation, and the description covers the remaining gaps an agent needs: where the valid input values come from, when to prefer this tool over get_schema, determinism, and unknown-kind error handling.

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 coverage is 100% and the enum documents all 36 values, so the baseline is 3. The description still adds meaning beyond the schema by tying the value to `list_kinds` as the authoritative source and stating that an unknown kind is an error result rather than a silent fallback.

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 verb and resource ('Get the smallest valid document of one kind, as JSON ready to edit') and immediately frames its value ('the fastest way to the right field names'). It is clearly distinguishable from get_schema, list_kinds, and render_document without opening any schema.

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?

Explicit routing: 'Use it after `list_kinds` has settled the kind, and `get_schema` only for a field the example leaves out.' It also names the precondition that `kind` must be an exact value from `list_kinds`, so the agent knows the call order across siblings.

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