Get a 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 the return payload (all fields, VAT subtotals, lines, accounting), which is useful behavioral context. However, it does not explicitly state this is a read-only operation, what happens if the document is not found, or any authorization requirements. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 front-loads the action and purpose, then enumerates the key fields returned. Every word contributes, with no filler 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?

For a simple get-by-id tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential information: what it does and what the response contains. It could mention error handling or confirm read-only behavior, but the core invocation details are present and the sibling context clarifies its role among related tools.

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% for both parameters (documentId and organization), so the schema already documents them fully. The description only repeats that the lookup is 'by its id' and does not add new semantics about parameter format or defaults 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 uses the specific verb 'Fetch' and names the resource 'full document object' with a clear scope ('by its id'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like wflow_search_documents (searching) and wflow_get_document_events (events) by enumerating included fields (VAT subtotals, lines, accounting).

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 you have a document ID and want the full object, but it does not explicitly discuss when to use this over alternatives such as wflow_search_documents or wflow_get_document_events. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated, so guidance is only implied.

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