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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that the operation is a read ('Get'), that it returns the full content, and that the output format is Markdown. This suffices for a straightforward retrieval tool, though it could mention implications like whether any additional metadata is included.

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 is front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word serves a purpose with no redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no output schema), the description adequately explains what the tool does. It could be slightly more explicit about the return format (e.g., 'only the markdown content'), but it is still sufficient for correct use.

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 100%, so the schema already explains the slug parameter. The description adds 'by slug' as a reinforcement but does not provide new semantics beyond the schema's 'Page slug, e.g. "about"'. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Get', specifies the resource 'published MojaLab static page', and indicates the output format 'as Markdown'. The parameter 'by slug' distinguishes it from siblings like get_post and list_pages, which serve different purposes.

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 implies use when needing full content of a specific page by slug, which is clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., when only page metadata is needed, use list_pages instead) or mention alternatives. For a simple tool, this is still good.

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