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

Annotations already indicate the operation is read-only and idempotent, so the description does not need to repeat that. It adds valuable behavioral context by stating the result is 'exactly as HTTP serves it' and that private tenant routes are excluded, which clarifies scope and fidelity beyond what annotations convey.

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 filler. The core behavior is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the key scope limitation is stated concisely in the second.

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 one-parameter fetch tool, the description covers what is returned, the accepted input forms, and the access boundary. Since the return format is explicitly stated as a Markdown document and the input schema is fully documented, the agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single parameter, including a clear description and examples. The tool description reiterates the path/URL distinction and adds a concrete example, but it does not materially extend the meaning beyond the 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 clearly states the tool's function: it returns the Markdown document of a public page from a root-relative path or absolute URL. It is specific about the resource and operation, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_pattern, which may also fetch a specific document.

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 about what can be fetched ('any public page') and notes a limitation ('Private tenant routes are not reachable here'). However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings such as get_pattern or search, leaving that inference to the agent.

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