Get a space computed revision

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=false, suggesting possible mutation, but the description does not clarify if this triggers computation or side effects. No behavioral context is added 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 very short and front-loaded with the endpoint. While concise, it sacrifices essential information. It is adequately sized for a simple tool but lacks substance.

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 the two parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain what a computed revision is, what the request body should contain, or what the response looks like, leaving the agent underinformed.

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%, but the description adds no meaningful detail. 'body' is described generically as a JSON object per the API, without specifying required fields or structure. The description does not compensate for the complexity of the nested object parameter.

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 'Get a space computed revision' with a verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from similar sibling tools like gitbook_get_revision_by_id or gitbook_get_current_revision, leaving ambiguity about what 'computed' means.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context about prerequisites or scenarios, providing no support for decision-making among the many sibling tools.

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