get_modding_doc

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 verb 'Read' conveys that this is a non-mutating operation, which is important for safety. However, it does not disclose behavior on invalid slugs, error conditions, or whether the documentation is local or remote, leaving some ambiguity.

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: 'Read one built-in documentation topic by its slug.' It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word contributes to understanding. There is no superfluous content.

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?

While the tool is simple, the description is incomplete in an important context: it does not tell the agent how to discover valid slugs or mention the related list_modding_docs tool. An agent could be left guessing how to populate the 'topic' parameter correctly, making the description inadequate for fully autonomous use.

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 only defines a single string parameter 'topic' with no description. The description adds crucial meaning by stating the topic is identified 'by its slug', clarifying that the 'topic' parameter expects a slug value. This is sufficient for a single-parameter tool, though it lacks examples or guidance on valid slug formats.

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 one built-in documentation topic by its slug. It uses a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('built-in documentation topic'), and the qualifier 'one' distinguishes it from sibling tool list_modding_docs, which presumably lists topics.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that a valid slug must first be obtained via list_modding_docs, nor does it explain when this tool is preferred over other documentation-related siblings.

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