Retrieve a OnePlatform documentation page as Markdown by passing its path or URL. Use it to read API and developer docs without needing an API key.
Devuelve una página de la documentación de OnePlatform en Markdown. Acepta la ruta de la página (por ejemplo /docs/saas/1platform-api/links-de-pago) o su URL. No necesita claves.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| path | Yes | Ruta o URL de la página en developer.1platform.pro. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context on top: the payload is returned in Markdown and no credentials are needed, which tells the agent it can call it blind. What it does not say is what happens on a nonexistent path or whether content is paginated.
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 short sentences: what it returns, what it accepts with an example, and the auth note. Front-loaded with the outcome and zero redundant text.
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 one-parameter read-only fetch with a fully documented schema and no output schema, the description covers return format (Markdown) and auth needs. Only error/not-found behavior is left unaddressed, a minor gap at this complexity level.
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 says the parameter accepts a route or URL on developer.1platform.pro. The description nevertheless adds a concrete worked example path (/docs/saas/1platform-api/links-de-pago), which is the piece agents most often guess wrong, so it edges above the baseline 3.
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: returns a OnePlatform documentation page in Markdown, which an agent can instantly tell apart from docs_search or api_get_operation. It does not explicitly name a sibling to contrast against, so it stops short of a 5.
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?
Usage is only implied by the name and by the note that no keys are required. There is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus docs_search (e.g. 'use this when you already have the path; use docs_search to find it'), and no exclusions or prerequisites beyond the auth note.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.