remarkable_get_document_info

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It explicitly discloses that it reads JSON only and does not render, indicating a read-only, lightweight operation. It also lists the return fields, providing a clear behavioral contract.

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: the first states the purpose, the second details return values and lightweight behavior. No filler words; every sentence contributes 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 single-parameter metadata tool with an output schema, the description covers what it does, what it returns, and its lightweight nature. It provides enough context to select it among siblings.

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 only parameter doc_id is not detailed in the description beyond the tool's purpose. The description implies that doc_id identifies the reMarkable document, but it doesn't explain how to obtain it or any format constraints, leaving the agent to infer from the tool's name.

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 'Get detailed metadata for a single reMarkable document' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling rendering and listing tools by emphasizing 'no rendering' and 'single document.'

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?

It implies usage for metadata retrieval without rendering, positioning itself as lightweight. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives like list_documents, but the context clearly separates this from rendering tools and the list tool.

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