knowbe4_policies_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It mentions 'including acknowledgment status' which adds some return-content context, but doesn't disclose anything about authentication requirements, data freshness, error conditions, or what the full response looks like.

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 efficient sentence that states the core purpose plus a useful detail. No wasted words, though it front-loads well enough and is easy to parse.

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 single-parameter get tool with no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. However, with zero annotations and no return structure info, it leaves the agent guessing about the exact response format. It's adequate but not thorough.

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% with a single 'policy_id' parameter described as 'The policy ID'. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema—nothing about how to obtain the ID (e.g., from the list tool) or ID format specifics. Per the rubric, baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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+resource action ('Get detailed information about a specific policy by ID') and adds the useful 'including acknowledgment status' detail. It's clear and distinguishable from the sibling knowbe4_policies_list tool, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from the list counterpart.

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?

No guidance on when to use this get-by-ID tool vs knowbe4_policies_list. It's implicit that you'd use this when you need a single policy's details, but no explicit context, prerequisites, or exclusion guidance is provided.

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