get_bookmarked_text

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'Get' but does not state if the operation is read-only, if it requires document open, or if it returns the text directly. The minimal description lacks behavioral depth.

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, highly concise and front-loaded. However, it may be too brief, but it earns high marks for efficiency with no wasted words.

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 low complexity (one parameter) and presence of an output schema (which may describe return type), the description is partially complete. It lacks mention of output format but is adequate for a simple getter. Score reflects mediocrity due to missing details.

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 0%, so description should add parameter meaning. The description says 'named bookmark' but does not explain the format or constraints of the 'name' parameter (e.g., case sensitivity, existence requirement). It adds little value beyond the parameter name.

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 'Get' and the resource 'text content within a named bookmark', distinguishing it from siblings like list_bookmarks (list bookmarks) and add_bookmark (create bookmark). It specifies the need for a named bookmark, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., bookmark must exist), and no context on when not to use it. This leaves the agent without usage direction.

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