get_examples

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes what the tool does (extracts code/example blocks) and includes usage examples, but lacks details on behavioral traits like rate limits, error handling, or output format. It's adequate but has gaps in transparency.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a usage guideline and examples. Every sentence earns its place, with no wasted words, making it highly efficient and well-structured for quick understanding.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is moderately complete: it covers purpose, usage, and parameter examples, but lacks details on output format, error cases, or system behavior. For a tool with 2 parameters and 100% schema coverage, it's adequate but could be more comprehensive.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds value by providing concrete examples (e.g., tech='python~3.10', path='library/asyncio') that illustrate parameter usage, but doesn't add new semantic details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specific action ('Extrae solo los bloques de código/ejemplos') and resource ('de una página de documentación'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_page_content or get_documentation_index that retrieve full content. The purpose is precise and differentiated.

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 states when to use this tool ('Útil cuando solo necesitas ver ejemplos de uso, no toda la documentación') and provides examples that clarify its scope versus alternatives like get_page_content for full documentation. This gives clear context for selection.

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