Get Linked File

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Get', implying a read operation, but it does not explain the purpose of the dry_run parameter, potential errors, or return behavior. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 sentence with no redundant words, clearly stating the action and the parameter type. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded.

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?

The tool has two parameters, one of which is unexplained, and no output schema or annotations. The description is too sparse to provide complete context for invocation, particularly regarding the dry_run parameter and what the tool returns.

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 schema has no property descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must compensate. It only mentions 'numeric ID', which adds minimal value over the schema's integer type, and completely fails to explain the dry_run parameter. This is inadequate for an agent to correctly interpret and use the parameters.

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 verb 'Get' with the resource 'linked file' and the identifier 'numeric ID', indicating a single-item retrieval. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_linked_files (for listing) and create/update/delete linked file operations.

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 implies usage when the user knows the numeric ID of a linked file, but it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or conditions for using this tool versus others. This is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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