Read Document Content

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. The description adds that the tool reads via WebSocket snapshot and returns blocks+plain text, which complements the annotations without contradiction.

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?

Two concise sentences. The first states the core function, the second adds optional usage guidance. 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 no output schema, the description mentions return content (blocks + plain text) but does not detail the structure. Annotations cover safety. It is fairly complete for a read tool but could benefit from slightly more detail on the response format.

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%; all parameters have descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of includeMarkdown ('to also get the rendered markdown') and its relationship to export_doc_markdown, which goes beyond the schema's description.

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 ('Read') and resource ('document block content via WebSocket snapshot'), and distinguishes from the sibling 'export_doc_markdown' by noting that includeMarkdown can avoid 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 mentions that includeMarkdown can be used to avoid a separate export_doc_markdown call, providing clear context for that parameter. However, it does not compare to other read tools like 'get_doc' or specify when not to use this tool.

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