Fetch the full content of a Fonto documentation page by its slug (the part of the URL after /latest/). Use search_fonto_docs or list_pages first to find the right slug.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Page slug, e.g. 'documentsmanager-f746b3a48442' |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| content | Yes | Markdown content of the documentation page |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, providing safety. The description adds behavioral context by stating it fetches 'full content' and explains the slug format. This is sufficient; no contradictions.
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, no waste. First sentence states purpose and method, second sentence provides workflow guidance. Every word adds value.
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 has a single required parameter, clear annotations, and an output schema, the description covers necessary preconditions (find slug first), the fetch action, and the slug format. It is complete for an AI agent.
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 input schema already describes the slug parameter with an example. The description adds semantic value by explaining the slug is 'the part of the URL after /latest/', which aids correct usage.
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 'Fetch' and the resource 'full content of a Fonto documentation page'. It also specifies the method 'by its slug' and distinguishes from siblings by advising to use search_fonto_docs or list_pages first to find the slug.
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 explicitly tells when to use this tool: after finding the slug via search_fonto_docs or list_pages. It guides the agent to use sibling tools first, providing clear workflow context.
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 has a clearly distinct purpose: fetching a page by slug, filtering pages by metadata, and full-text search. There is no overlap in functionality.
All three tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: get_fonto_page, list_pages, search_fonto_docs. The naming is predictable and clear.
With only 3 tools, the set is minimal but covers the core documentation needs (retrieve, list, search). It feels slightly thin but is still appropriate for a focused documentation server.
The three tools provide a complete workflow for accessing documentation: search, browse, and retrieve. A minor gap might be lack of a tool to get all categories or hierarchical navigation, but the existing tools are sufficient for most use cases.