get_envelope

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that embedded recipients have no signing link and require create_embed_link, and that ordered recipients have signingOrder and activatedAt fields, going well beyond a simple retrieval statement.

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 with the purpose front-loaded. The second sentence provides valuable edge-case details without redundancy or fluff.

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-parameter get operation, the description covers the returned state components and specific recipient behaviors, sufficient for an agent to call the tool and interpret results. With no output schema, the description compensates well.

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 description does not elaborate on the envelopeId parameter beyond the schema's 'The envelope ID to retrieve'. Since schema coverage is 100%, no additional parameter information is strictly needed, but the description adds no value here.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves the current state of an envelope, listing specific content (status, document progress, per-recipient signing status). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_recipient and get_document by focusing on envelope-level state.

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 provides some guidance about embedded recipients and suggests create_embed_link for minting links, but it does not explicitly contrast get_envelope with alternative retrieval tools like get_recipient or list_recipients. Usage context is implied rather than clearly stated.

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