get_research_content

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 implies a read operation and that content is 'extracted,' but it does not explain return format, whether raw or structured content is returned, or any limitations. This is minimal transparency.

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 wasted words. It is appropriately concise for a simple retrieval tool, though it lacks additional useful context.

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?

Given the absence of annotations, output schema, and usage guidance, the description is not complete enough for an agent to confidently select and invoke this tool. It does not clarify the relationship to get_research_document or search_research_content, nor what 'extracted' content means in practice.

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 0%, so the description needed to compensate for the single parameter, document_id. It does not describe what the document ID represents, how to obtain it, or any format expectations. The parameter name and title provide some self-evident meaning, but the description adds nothing 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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Retrieve extracted research document content.' It is reasonably specific about the operation and object, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_research_document or search_research_content.

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 usage context is provided. The description does not say when to use this tool instead of get_research_document, search_research_content, or extract_pdf_text, and there are no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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