Fetch one ChangeGamer guide cluster (topic bundle) from the free editorial layer: pillar metadata, every sub-article with variant URLs, and the pillar’s full Markdown body. Use list_articles to discover cluster ids.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| cluster_id | Yes | Cluster id, e.g. "rag-in-production" |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It adds meaningful context by stating this is from the 'free editorial layer' and describes the returned components. Yet it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, side effects, or explicitly state that the operation is read-only (though 'Fetch' implies it).
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 two sentences with no fluff; the first sentence identifies the operation and output, the second gives discovery guidance. It is appropriately front-loaded and compact.
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?
Although there is no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating exactly what is returned: pillar metadata, every sub-article with variant URLs, and full Markdown body. The single parameter and its discovery hint are covered. Minor gaps like error handling or explicit read-only wording remain.
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 schema already documents cluster_id with 100% coverage and an example. The description adds further value by pointing to list_articles as the discovery mechanism for cluster ids, strengthening the semantic understanding of the parameter.
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 a specific verb 'Fetch' and clearly names the resource as 'one ChangeGamer guide cluster (topic bundle)'. It also enumerates the returned content (pillar metadata, sub-articles, full Markdown body). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like get_article or get_corpus, so it falls just short of a 5.
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 a useful discovery tip: 'Use list_articles to discover cluster ids', which helps the agent find the required parameter. However, it does not tell the agent when to choose get_cluster over get_article or get_corpus, leaving usage largely implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct action: checking access, fetching corpus (free vs full), pricing, payment, listing, searching, stats, and single resource retrieval. No significant overlap.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case (e.g., check_access, get_corpus, list_resources). Verbs are uniform and descriptive.
With 10 tools, the set is well-scoped for a resource access and management API. Each tool serves a clear purpose without redundancy or excessive number.
The toolset covers core operations: access verification, corpus retrieval (free and premium), pricing, payment info, resource listing, search, and stats. Missing write operations (e.g., purchase), but acceptable for a read-focused server.