sd_get_document_by_id

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns a 'Formatted markdown string with document content' and implies a read-only operation via 'Retrieve' and 'detailed view.' It lacks explicit safety/permission notes, but for a simple lookup tool this is sufficient 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 well-structured with clear section headers (PURPOSE, WHEN TO USE, etc.) and is front-loaded with the core action. No redundant sentences; each section contributes to understanding tool usage.

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 tool with an output schema, the description covers usage, input semantics, and output format. It also provides clear usage boundaries relative to siblings, making it complete within the given context.

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 0%, but the description adds meaning: 'document_id: The xml:id of the document.' This explains the semantic nature of the identifier beyond the bare parameter name, which is valuable given the otherwise sparse 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 'Retrieve complete document' and specifies 'Detailed view of a specific document as Markdown,' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from siblings like sd_get_raw_document_by_id and sd_get_diary_entry by emphasizing the 'complete' and 'Markdown' format.

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?

Explicit WHEN TO USE and WHEN NOT TO USE sections provide clear context: reading letters/diary entries, after search, and for citations. It names specific alternatives (list_collections, search_by_keyword) for browsing and searching, which is excellent sibling differentiation.

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