kb_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It explains the result content ('full text and payload') and adds important scoping behavior: when source is omitted, every known collection is checked. It doesn't cover not-found behavior or auth requirements, but for a simple getter this is reasonably transparent.

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 compact and front-loaded: one clear summary sentence followed by a concise Args section. Every sentence contributes meaningful information with 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?

For a two-parameter getter with an output schema present, the description covers the essential call semantics and parameter behavior. It could have explicitly pointed to kb_list_sources for valid source values or described not-found behavior, but these are minor gaps given the tool's simplicity and the availability of an output schema.

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%, and the description fully compensates by explaining both parameters. It defines 'id' as the chunk id returned by kb_search, and 'source' as an optional collection-scoping hint with explicit default behavior when omitted. This adds real meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch the full text and payload of a chunk by id.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like kb_search, kb_list_sources, and kb_reindex, which serve different operations.

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 gives clear context: the id should come from 'kb_search', and the source hint scopes the lookup, with the default behavior of checking every known collection if omitted. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives, but the linkage to kb_search provides strong usage guidance.

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