Fetch a live build.avax.network page as markdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, which cover the safety profile. The description adds value by noting the tool fetches the 'CURRENT' version (implying possible divergence from local cache) and that output is 'clean markdown' via the .md endpoint, providing behavioral context beyond the schema.

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, with the primary purpose front-loaded and usage guidance following immediately. Every phrase contributes either to scope, freshness, or fallback conditions, with no filler.

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?

For a simple fetch tool, the description covers what it does, when to use it, and the input format. The missing offset explanation is the only notable gap, but given the tool's low complexity and the annotations covering side effects, it is otherwise complete enough for an agent to call correctly.

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 50% (url described, offset not mentioned). The description restates the url format ('full URL or site path') but adds no detail beyond the schema's own description. The offset parameter is completely undocumented in both schema and description, leaving an agent without any clue as to its purpose or effect.

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 fetches the CURRENT version of any build.avax.network page as markdown, enumerating the page types (docs, academy, integrations, blog, acps) and the mechanism (official .md endpoint). This distinguishes it from local-index tools like avax_get_doc or avax_list_docs by emphasizing freshness.

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?

It explicitly specifies when to use this tool: when the local index may be stale (check builtAt in avax_list_topics) or for pages not indexed. This gives clear contextual triggers, though it does not name the exact alternative tool to switch from, relying on the reader to infer that avax_get_doc is the local-index counterpart.

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