Get Doc Content

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds valuable behavioral context by explaining the different API calls based on file type (Docs API vs Drive API), which is beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 succinct sentences with a bullet point for key differentiation. Every sentence adds value and is front-loaded. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the two file types and API handling, which is sufficient for this complexity. Minor gap: missing mention of potential limitations like file size or error conditions, but these may be covered in output schema or annotations.

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. The description does not add detail beyond the schema for parameters like user_google_email or suggestions_view_mode, but it mentions document_id in context. The schema already provides enum descriptions, so the description adds minimal value for parameters.

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 it retrieves content of Google Docs or Drive files (e.g., .docx) and distinguishes the handling via Docs API vs Drive API. This differentiates it from siblings like get_doc_as_markdown or get_drive_file_content, providing clear purpose.

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 for retrieving document content but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like get_doc_as_markdown. There is no mention of exclusions or context for when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer based on file type.

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