Get document

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only. The description adds useful behavioral detail: metadata names are resolved, and the response includes extracted text, notes, and custom field values. No contradictions with the readOnlyHint annotation.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and payload, with no filler. Every clause contributes either scope or usage guidance.

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 single-document read tool with a fully documented schema and read-only annotations, the description covers the main behavior and even notes the natural predecessor tool. It does not explicitly contrast with downloading the file, but the listed return contents make the distinction inferable.

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%, including defaults and limits for include_content, include_metadata, and content_max_chars. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond that, matching the baseline for fully documented schemas.

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 ('Fetch one document by id') and enumerates what is returned: metadata with resolved names, extracted text, notes, and custom field values. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling search and download 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?

Explicitly says to use this after `paperless_search_documents` for reading a document's contents. It does not mention the alternative `paperless_download_document`, but the intended context is clear enough for an agent.

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