Get Zendesk developer docs page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context by disclosing what is returned: markdown-ish text, headings, badges such as Deprecated, and lifecycle classification.

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?

One tightly written sentence that front-loads the core action and follows with the return shape. Nothing is padded, though the two halves (what it fetches, what it returns) could be split more cleanly for scanning.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing results and does so adequately (markdown text, headings, badges, lifecycle classification). For a single-parameter, read-only fetch tool this is sufficient; only cross-page navigation guidance is missing.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, and the schema already states the url must be on developer.zendesk.com. The description adds no extra format, canonicalization, or redirect-handling detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (fetch and clean) and a specific resource (one developer.zendesk.com page), and enumerates the page kinds it handles (API reference, guide, changelog). The word 'one' implicitly separates it from sibling search_developer_docs, but it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied by 'one ... page' and the URL constraint. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no routing to alternatives such as search_developer_docs or get_feature_lifecycle, which an agent could easily confuse with this tool.

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