Read Document Content

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the mechanism (WebSocket snapshot) and output (blocks, plain text, optional markdown). However, it does not mention read-only nature, permissions, or performance impacts, leaving gaps.

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 concise, consisting of two sentences that efficiently convey the core functionality and a key parameter option. No redundant or extraneous information.

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 and lack of output schema, the description covers the main points but could be more complete by explaining what 'blocks' means and differentiating from sibling tools like get_doc. It mentions WebSocket snapshot as a unique detail.

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?

Only includeMarkdown has a schema description; workspaceId and docId lack descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of includeMarkdown and how it avoids a separate call, but it does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions for the other two parameters.

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 tool reads document block content via WebSocket snapshot, returning blocks and plain text. It distinguishes itself by mentioning the includeMarkdown parameter as an alternative to a separate call to export_doc_markdown, which differentiates it from sibling tools.

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 guidance on when to use includeMarkdown (to avoid a separate export call) but does not specify when to use this tool over other read tools like get_doc or get_edgeless_canvas. General usage context is lacking.

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