get_docReturn a full SukukFi documentation page as markdown. Call search_docs first to find a slug, or pass a known slug such as "for-capital-providers/risk-considerations".
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Page slug, e.g. "overview" |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the output format (markdown) and that it returns a full page, which is useful. It does not mention error behavior or authentication, but for a simple documentation getter this is adequate and transparent about its core behavior.
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?
Two sentences with zero waste. The primary action is stated first, and the second sentence enriches usage context with an example and workflow. Every phrase contributes.
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-only tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it defines the purpose, the input, the workflow, and the output format. No critical information 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% with an example, but the description adds semantic value by advising to use search_docs first and offering a realistic, domain-specific slug example, enhancing the schema's minimal description.
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 ('Return') and clearly identifies the resource ('a full SukukFi documentation page as markdown'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_docs which locate pages. It also provides an example slug for concrete identification.
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?
Explicitly instructs to call search_docs first to find a slug, or alternatively pass a known slug. This directly guides the agent on when and how to use the tool versus the search alternative.
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 clearly distinct purpose: contract addresses, documentation pages, vault stats, vault terms, and documentation search. Even the relationship between search_docs and get_doc follows a standard find-then-retrieve pattern without ambiguity.
Four of five tools follow the get_<noun> pattern, making the purpose clear at a glance. search_docs deviates slightly by using a different verb, but the choice is natural and the overall convention remains predictable.
Five tools is well-scoped for an informational server covering docs, contracts, and vault data. Each tool serves a distinct need without redundancy or bloat.
The toolset covers the full informational surface for SulukFi: contract addresses, live metrics, terms, documentation retrieval, and full-text search. There are no obvious dead ends or missing operations for the stated purpose.