get_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. However, it only states the action and resource, without disclosing any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, error behavior (e.g., 404 if file not found), return format, or whether the operation is read-only. The verb 'get' implies read-only, but this is not explicit.

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 concise sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose. No filler or redundant information, and it is front-loaded with the action and resource.

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 simplicity of a get-by-ID metadata operation and the complete schema, the description is adequate but minimal. However, without an output schema or annotations, it does not clarify what specific metadata will be returned, error handling, or permissions, leaving some gaps for an agent relying solely on this description.

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 100%, with both app_id and file_id fully described as unique identifiers. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already documents, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get file metadata by ID' uses a specific verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('file metadata'), and a scope ('by ID'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like download_file (which fetches content) and list_files (which lists multiple files).

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 this tool is for fetching a single file's metadata when an ID is available, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are provided, so the context is clear but lacks explicit guidance.

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