Read Document Content

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

The description reveals that the tool uses a 'WebSocket snapshot' to fetch data and returns 'blocks + plain text' and optionally markdown. Although no annotations are provided, these details give useful behavioral context beyond the implicit read-only nature.

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 two sentences, front-loading the main purpose and adding a specific usage tip in the second. No redundant or unnecessary 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?

The description explains the return format (blocks, plain text, optional markdown) and the technical detail of using a WebSocket snapshot. For a read tool with few parameters, this is complete enough, though it could mention if there are any size limits or pagination.

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?

The description adds meaning to the 'includeMarkdown' parameter by explaining its purpose and benefit, but it does not describe 'workspaceId' or 'docId' beyond what the schema provides (schema coverage 33%). The description partially compensates but leaves a gap.

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 'Read' and the resource 'document block content', and it distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'export_doc_markdown' by mentioning the includeMarkdown option as an alternative to a separate call.

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 explicitly says when to use includeMarkdown ('useful when you need to read content without a separate export_doc_markdown call'), providing guidance on when to use this tool versus an alternative. However, it does not cover when to prefer other read-related siblings like get_doc.

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