Get Document

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses what data is returned and calls out the attached-file indicator. However, it does not address failure modes, permissions, or how this differs behaviorally from related getters beyond the scope of metadata.

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?

A single well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action ('Fetch full metadata') and then lists the meaningful fields. There is no wasted text or unnecessary repetition of the tool name.

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 get-by-ID operation with one required parameter and an output schema present, the description provides sufficient context by enumerating the metadata categories returned. It lacks explicit alternative routing and error behavior, but these are minor given the tool's simplicity.

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 0%, but there is only one parameter, document_id, whose role is easily inferred from 'one library document'. The description doesn't explain the ID format or provide lookup guidance, but for a single obvious parameter the name plus context is mostly adequate.

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?

Description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch full metadata for one library document' and lists concrete fields (identifiers, abstract, keywords, tags, timestamps, file attachment). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like mendeley_get_document_text, mendeley_get_file_content, and mendeley_list_documents.

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 singular 'one library document' clearly indicates the intended use case: retrieve complete metadata for a specific document by its ID. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough to avoid confusion with search/list/content siblings.

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