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

Annotations already mark it as readOnly, non-destructive, and open-world, and the description adds useful behavioral context: it is unauthenticated, returns Markdown, only fetches docs.wavedash.com pages, and returns the full page. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

Three concise sentences: the first states the core action and format, the second provides usage guidance, and the third adds constraints and auth status. Every sentence earns its place, and the primary purpose is front-loaded.

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?

With an output schema available, the return format is already covered. The description covers the action, input form, examples, usage context, domain restriction, authentication status, and read-only safety. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke this 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains the path parameter well. The description repeats this with additional examples and the domain restriction, but adds little semantic value beyond what the schema already provides. 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 'Fetch', the resource ('full Wavedash docs page as Markdown'), and the input form ('by path or docs.wavedash.com URL') with concrete examples. It is easy to distinguish from siblings like search_wavedash_docs, as this tool fetches a specific page rather than searching.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool: 'when the user wants to see a Wavedash docs page or when exact SDK, CLI, or config details are needed.' It also gives a clear constraint ('Only docs.wavedash.com pages can be fetched'). It does not explicitly name alternatives such as search_wavedash_docs for the 'when not to use' case, but the use context is strong.

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