Read a full documentation page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description doesn't need to repeat those. It adds valuable context about truncation at 25k chars and the `offset` mechanism to continue reading, which is beyond what annotations and schema provide. No 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 sentences, no fluff. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the truncation detail is stated succinctly as an important behavior. Every word earns its place.

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 read-only doc fetch tool with no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: how to specify the path, the truncation limit, and offset continuation. It doesn't elaborate on error handling, but that's not critical for this simple tool. Overall complete for an agent to call it 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 only 50% (offset lacks a description). The description compensates by explaining `path` can come from search/list or a URL, and explicitly states `offset` is used to continue after truncation. This adds meaning to both parameters, especially offset, which is otherwise undocumented.

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?

States the action (return full text), the resource (documentation page), and explicitly identifies how to specify it via `path` from avax_search_docs/avax_list_docs or a URL. This makes the purpose clear and distinguishes it from sibling tools like avax_get_guide or avax_fetch_live_doc.

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?

Clearly indicates the path source (from avax_search_docs/avax_list_docs), implying those are prerequisite tools for finding pages. Also explains the truncation and continuation behavior, which guides when to use `offset`. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus similar alternatives, so not a full 5.

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