zen_page_text_by_tab_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The description only notes that it returns 'full visible text content' and operates without switching tabs. It does not disclose potential errors (e.g., invalid tab ID, unloaded page), side effects, or whether it is read-only. This is insufficient for a tool that accesses page content.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-line summary, an argument definition, and a return statement. No unnecessary words, and the format is clear.

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 output schema, the description mentions the return type (full visible text). However, it lacks information about error handling, edge cases, and compatibility with other tools (e.g., relationship to zen_page_text). For a simple tool, it is adequate but not 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds crucial meaning to the single parameter tab_id by stating it is a 'tab ID to read from' and directing users to get IDs from zen_tabs. This compensates for the schema's lack of description.

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 action ('Get page text'), the resource ('page text from a specific tab by ID'), and a key differentiator ('without switching to it'). This distinguishes it from related tools like zen_page_text (likely for current tab) and zen_switch_tab.

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 provides context on when to use the tool: when you have a tab ID and want text without switching. It also points to zen_tabs to get IDs. However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it (e.g., for current tab, use zen_page_text).

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