wavedash_get_docFetch a full Wavedash docs page as Markdown by path or docs.wavedash.com URL. Read-only and unauthenticated.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | Docs path or URL, for example sdk/setup, engines/phaser, publishing/upload, or https://docs.wavedash.com/sdk/setup. |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| text | Yes | Human-readable tool result text. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations: it explicitly states 'Read-only and unauthenticated.' This informs the agent that no authentication is required and that the operation is safe, which is valuable and consistent with the annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false).
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 a single sentence that front-loads the primary action and output format. Every word serves a purpose, with no filler or redundancy.
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's simplicity (single parameter, output schema exists), the description covers essential aspects: input format, output format, read-only behavior, and authentication requirement. It is contextually complete for effective tool selection and invocation.
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% for the single parameter 'path', which is already well-documented with examples. The tool description simply repeats 'by path or URL' without adding new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and clearly identifies the resource ('full Wavedash docs page as Markdown'). It explicitly mentions the input options (path or URL) and output format, making the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like wavedash_search_docs.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., wavedash_search_docs for searching, or other wavedash tools for different content). The description states it is read-only and unauthenticated, but does not explain usage context or exclusions.
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: workflow, documentation retrieval, checklists, quickstart, SDK reference, planning, search, and config validation. No overlap.
Most tools follow verb_noun pattern with 'get_' prefix, but 'implementation_planner' deviates as a noun phrase, slightly reducing consistency.
8 tools is well-scoped for a documentation and planning assistant—not too few to cover needs, not too many to overwhelm.
The tool set comprehensively covers the stated domain: fetching docs, planning implementations, searching, and validating config. No obvious gaps for its read-only purpose.