get_diagram

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it does so well: it discloses the access restriction (URL openable only by Space members), the special 'Share (public, read-only):' line, that public links are minted by humans via the Share button, and the semantic meaning of the description field as the agent's brief. This is rich behavioral context for a read operation.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and return values, then the public-link nuance, then the workflow tip. The 'minted by a person' explanation is slightly verbose but earns its place by clarifying that the agent cannot generate public links itself. No filler.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description correctly takes on the job of explaining the return shape (title, description, mermaid source, URL, public-link line). For a one-parameter fetch tool with no annotations, the access restriction, return format, and workflow guidance together make it complete enough to call correctly.

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% and the schema already documents the single 'id' param as 'Diagram UUID'. The description only echoes 'by id' and adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: 'Fetch one diagram by id', and enumerates the exact return values (title, description/mermaid brief, mermaid source code, app URL). The singular 'one...by id' clearly differentiates it from list_diagrams and from get_deck/get_version on other resources, so an agent can select it correctly without opening schemas.

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?

Provides clear workflow context: 'Read the description before editing — it tells you what the diagram is for and when to update it', which routes the agent to inspect the diagram before calling update_diagram. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions (e.g., 'use list_diagrams to search'), but the single-id scope and the pre-edit instruction give usable guidance.

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