Get file

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description's 'Get metadata' is consistent with a read operation. The description adds value by specifying the return fields (name, size, URL), which is useful since there is no output schema. No extra behavioral details like auth or errors are disclosed, but the read-only nature is already covered.

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 sentence that immediately states the action, target, and output. It is front-loaded, contains no redundant wording, and every word contributes 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 simple single-parameter read operation with annotations covering safety, the description is complete. It states the input (ID), the target (previously uploaded file), and the output fields (name, size, URL). No output schema exists, but the description provides the necessary return information. Complexities like error handling are not essential for this simple tool.

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?

The input schema already provides full coverage for the single parameter 'id' with description 'File ID (UUID)'. The description adds only the context that the file was 'previously uploaded', which is mildly helpful but not essential. Baseline 3 applies because 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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'file' and clearly states the output is metadata (name, size, URL) identified by ID. This is distinct from sibling tools like get_video or get_order, so there is no ambiguity about its purpose.

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 clearly states it is for 'previously uploaded file', implying use after upload_file. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool when needing file metadata.

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