doc_outline

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a plan requirement (PRO+) but doesn't describe side effects, return format, error behavior if the plan isn't met, or any other behavioral traits. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 with no extraneous words, efficiently communicating the core action and a key constraint. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 is incomplete for confident tool invocation. It does not specify how to select the doc page, what the outline structure looks like, or how it differs from sibling tools. Given the empty schema and no output schema, the description fails to provide essential selection or execution context.

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 tool has zero defined parameters, which would normally yield a baseline of 4. However, the schema has additionalProperties: true, and the description doesn't explain how the target doc page is identified, leaving a critical ambiguity. This reduces the score to 3 because the description should have compensated for the missing parameter context.

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 'Get' and resource 'outline/structure of a doc page,' which is fairly clear and distinct from many sibling tools. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from similar tools like get_doc_graph, leaving some ambiguity about what 'structure' encompasses.

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 versus alternatives. It only mentions 'PRO+ plan' as a prerequisite, but that is a requirement rather than a usage guideline. No exclusions, alternatives, or contextual triggers are discussed.

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