get_article

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Full content' hints that the response includes the complete article body rather than a snippet, but nothing is said about error behavior for invalid IDs, permissions, rate limits, or response format.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the verb and resource with zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but thin: it does not characterize the returned content shape beyond 'full content', nor does it cover failure modes. An agent can call it correctly, but with minimal supporting context.

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% for the single 'article_id' parameter, so the schema already documents it. The description's 'by ID' matches that semantic but adds no further meaning such as expected format or where to obtain the ID.

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 states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Help Center article') with a clear identifier qualifier ('by ID'), so the agent knows exactly what it retrieves. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling 'search_articles', leaving the distinction (fetch-one-by-ID vs. query-many) to inference.

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 phrase 'by ID' implies this is the tool to call when an article ID is already known, in contrast to 'search_articles' which would be used for discovery. However, no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no sibling is named.

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