get_single_Rspace_document

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 does not explicitly declare the operation as read-only, nor does it describe return format, error handling, or any side effects. The only added detail—'numeric id or string globalId'—is largely redundant with the schema's anyOf type, providing minimal beyond-annotation value.

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 that is front-loaded with the primary action and resource. It contains no unnecessary words and is extremely efficient while still conveying essential information.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description adequately conveys the tool's purpose and identifier requirements. However, it could be more complete by mentioning what the response contains or how errors are handled, especially given the lack of an output schema.

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 provides only a minimal 'Doc Id' title with no description, and its coverage is 0%. The description compensates by clarifying that the parameter accepts a numeric id or a string globalId, adding meaningful context about the parameter's format and purpose beyond the schema.

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 action (gets) and resource (a single RSpace document), and it specifies accepted identifier types (numeric id or string globalId). It is distinct from the sibling get_documents by emphasizing 'single', but it does not explicitly name the alternative, preventing a perfect score.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_documents. The description does not mention any contexts, exclusions, or alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and description alone.

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