get_document

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It indicates a read-only operation with no side effects, but does not mention error handling (e.g., missing file), path restrictions, or access constraints. The output schema covers return values, but behavioral context is limited.

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 primary verb and resource. It contains no redundant information and is appropriately sized for a simple tool.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema, but the description lacks usage guidance and behavioral details that would help an agent select and invoke it correctly. It is adequate for a basic read operation but leaves gaps around error cases and when to prefer this over sibling 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. The description implies 'relative_path' is relative to the configured knowledge directory but does not explicitly explain the parameter, its format, or any constraints. This is minimal value beyond the parameter name.

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 clearly states the action ('Read') and resource ('a document from the configured knowledge directory'). It distinguishes from siblings like search_knowledge_base by indicating a direct file read by path rather than a search or query operation.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search_knowledge_base. The description does not mention prerequisites, limitations, or preferred scenarios, leaving the agent without explicit usage context.

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