get_reference

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, covering the read-only nature. The description adds the behavioral distinction between returning a full doc and a summary, but does not disclose any other behaviors (e.g., maxSections limit, error handling). Minimal extra context is provided beyond annotations.

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 a single concise sentence, front-loaded with the primary action and alternative outcome. It avoids filler and irrelevant details, achieving excellent conciseness.

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?

The tool is a simple read-only operation with clear parameter enums and readOnlyHint annotation. The description provides enough context for the primary modes, but lacks information about return types and behavior for invalid docIds. Given the tool's simplicity, it is reasonably complete, though a mention of maxSections would enhance it.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain the mode parameter (doc vs summary) via the tool's purpose, and docId is fully enumerated in the schema. However, it does not add semantics for maxSections beyond the schema's default/maximum, so the description adds some but not complete parameter value.

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 reads a single packaged reference document or returns its compact summary. It specifies the verb ('read') and resource ('packaged reference doc'), and distinguishes between two modes via the mode parameter, effectively separating it from siblings like get_reference_route.

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 offers no explicit when-to-use guidance, alternatives, or exclusions. It implies usage context (reading reference docs) but does not state when to prefer summary mode over full doc mode or how maxSections affects the summary, leaving usage purely implied.

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