get_asset_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Get details' implies a non-mutating read operation, but it does not state what is returned, whether content is downloaded, what errors occur, or any other behavioral traits. The description adds little beyond what the tool name already conveys.

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, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words or repetition. Every word contributes to the core message, making it maximally concise, even if the content is thin.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should clarify what 'details' means, and it does not. Given the large set of sibling tools, the description lacks the contextual information needed for an agent to know precisely what this tool returns or how it differs from other file-related getters. The simple name and parameters partially compensate, but overall the definition is incomplete.

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%, with both parameters documented as UUIDs. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond confirming that a specific file is being fetched. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('details of a specific file'), which clearly indicates a read operation on a single file. However, 'details' is generic and could apply to several sibling tools like get_file_mediainfo or get_file_download_url, so it does not fully differentiate the tool's exact purpose.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as list_asset_files, get_file_mediainfo, or get_asset_file_set_details. The only implied context comes from the parameter names (asset_id, file_id) in the schema, not from the description.

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