read_doc_markdown

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

Describes key behaviors: reads as Markdown, accepts multiple ID formats, and handles embedded images/files as placeholders with a note to call another tool. Without annotations, this adds sufficient transparency for safe usage.

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?

Three concise sentences with front-loaded main purpose. No redundant information; each sentence adds value.

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 operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers output format, input variations, and side effects (image placeholders). No gaps identified.

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 of document_id adds no new meaning beyond the input schema, which already describes it thoroughly. Baseline score of 3 applies given 100% schema coverage.

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?

Clearly states the tool reads a Feishu doc as Markdown, contrasting with get_doc_blocks JSON. It specifies the use case (RAG/digest/summarisation) and token savings, making the purpose distinct and actionable.

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?

Provides context for when to use (Markdown vs JSON) and token savings, and lists accepted input types. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or exclude alternatives like get_doc_blocks, though the contrast implies it.

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