get_doc

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the fetch is live from houdinimd.jchd.me and that no Houdini connection is needed, which adds genuine context. However, it does not mention potential failures, network dependency, or that it is a safe read-only operation, so transparency is only partial.

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 concise sentences, action-first, with the example bolted on. No filler. The key details (content, source, connection requirement) are all present 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?

For a simple single-parameter fetch tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description covers the essential action, source, and return format. It could add note about error handling or path resolution, but the example and constraint make it fairly complete for an agent to invoke 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?

The schema has a single required 'path' with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It provides a concrete example ('nodes/sop/attribwrangle') that clarifies the expected format, giving agents a strong hint. It stops short of specifying path syntax rules (e.g., whether extension is needed), but for one parameter this is adequate.

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 full markdown of a Houdini doc page, with a concrete example. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like get_node_doc or search_docs, leaving some ambiguity about the exact scope.

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 mentions it fetches live from an external site and does not require a Houdini connection, which provides context for when to use it. But it does not state when to prefer it over alternatives or when not to use it, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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