get_document

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fill the gap. It states the tool performs a read operation ('Get detailed information'), but fails to disclose any potential side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error handling. This is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides an alternative. No unnecessary words are included, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 simple read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and distinguishes from one sibling. However, it does not describe the return value or disambiguate from other document-related tools like 'get_document_comments' or 'get_document_history'. The context is adequate but not fully complete.

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 input schema has zero description coverage for its only parameter, 'documentId'. The description does not add any meaning about the parameter, such as its format, source, or constraints. The agent receives no guidance on how to populate this parameter correctly.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'USER document', and the scope 'in workspace'. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'read_resource' by explicitly saying 'For SYSTEM help, use read_resource!', showing clear differentiation.

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 explicitly tells the agent to use 'read_resource' for SYSTEM documents, providing an alternative. However, it does not specify prerequisites or other contexts where this tool should not be used, leaving some gaps.

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