Get Smithsonian Record Details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds behavioral context by listing the specific fields returned (e.g., title, license, online media) and confirming it is a retrieval operation. No contradictions exist.

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, well-structured sentence that fronts the purpose and includes a valuable usage note. Every part is necessary—no redundancy or wasted words.

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 simple input, comprehensive annotations, and the presence of an output schema (not shown but referenced), the description covers all needed context: what the tool does, what fields it returns, and how to obtain the required ID. No gaps.

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 100% coverage for the single required parameter 'id', including its own description. The tool description does not add significant new meaning beyond restating that the ID comes from a previous search. Per guidelines, baseline 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 specifies the exact action ('Get full record'), the resource ('Smithsonian Open Access item'), and the key fields returned (title, unit code, license, etc.). It clearly distinguishes from the sibling tool smithsonian.collection.search by stating that this tool retrieves details by ID after searching.

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 instructs the agent to use smithsonian.search first to find IDs, providing clear guidance on when to invoke this tool. It does not detail when not to use it, but the usage context is sufficiently clear.

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