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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: the output is Markdown 'exactly as published' and is scoped to a single page, which matters because there is no output schema to convey the return format.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first clause, followed by the slug taxonomy and the search_docs pointer. The slug enumeration is long but earns its space given there is no enum constraint; only minor tightening is possible.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, valid inputs, output format (Markdown, verbatim), and the fallback path via search_docs. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already gives slug examples, so baseline is 3. The description goes further by enumerating the accepted slug vocabulary (index, guide names, 'reference', 'reference/leads'), which effectively substitutes for the missing enum and tells the agent what a valid slug looks like.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one page of the Vocenya developer docs as Markdown') and pins the granularity ('one page'). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling search_docs, which the agent could otherwise confuse it with.

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?

'Use search_docs to find a slug' explicitly routes the agent to the alternative when the slug is unknown, which is the main usage fork. It does not state exclusions or prerequisites (e.g., auth, whether unpublished pages are reachable), so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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