retell_get_knowledge_base

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits on its own. It merely restates the operation name ('Get details') without explaining return format, error handling, authentication needs, or what 'details' actually includes. This leaves significant transparency gaps for the agent.

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, directly worded sentence with no filler. 'Get details about a specific knowledge base' immediately conveys the action and object, and the front-loaded structure makes it highly scannable.

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 is simple with one parameter and no output schema, so the description must carry the burden of explaining what is returned. However, it does not specify the shape or content of the 'details,' nor any error conditions. It is minimally adequate for a straightforward read operation but lacks full contextual completeness.

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 description does not discuss the parameter, but the input schema fully describes knowledge_base_id as 'The unique ID of the knowledge base.' Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no additional semantic value 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 ('Get') and the resource ('knowledge base'), with the modifier 'specific' indicating a single entity. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_knowledge_bases (plural), create, and delete, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 agent has a knowledge_base_id and needs details, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over list_knowledge_bases or mention alternatives. No exclusions or comparative guidance is given, so the usage context is only implied by the terminology.

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