Get writing piece

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description still adds value by disclosing the outcome shape ('Returns the piece object or a not-found error'), which tells the agent how to detect a bad ID. It doesn't cover pagination or whether the returned draft is the latest revision, but that is minor here.

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?

Three compact sentences: identity, routing, and input/return contract, in that order. No filler, no restatement of the tool name, and the most decision-relevant facts come first.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the resource, the sibling routing, the alias/precedence rule, and the failure mode. Nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuinely useful information the schema does not: it clarifies that one of the two aliases must be supplied even though 'required' is empty, and restates precedence ('id takes precedence') in the callable prose rather than only in a property description.

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 ('Read one saved Writing Studio tweet, thread or blog draft') with explicit scope: exactly one piece, and it enumerates the content types covered. It is clearly distinguishable from list_writing_pieces (listing) and get_script (video scripts) without opening a schema.

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?

Gives explicit sequencing ('Use after list_writing_pieces') and names the alternatives with their conditions: write_tweet/write_blog for saving new drafts, get_script for video scripts. An agent knows both when to call this and when to route elsewhere.

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