get_ro_reference_page

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

Behavioral transparency is partially addressed: the description informs the agent that it returns 'complete wikitext' and that the title must be exact, while also constraining source_id to 'irowiki' or 'fandom'. However, it omits information about error handling, authentication, or other potential side effects, leaving gaps in the behavioral disclosure.

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 exceptionally concise: one sentence stating the tool's purpose followed by a minimal argument list. Every element contributes directly to understanding, with no wasted words or redundant information.

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?

For a simple getter tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential context: the return type, allowed sources, and the exact-title requirement. It lacks only explicit usage guidance relative to sibling tools, which is a minor gap given the tool's straightforward nature.

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 description explicitly defines both parameters: source_id is limited to 'irowiki' or 'fandom', and title must be the exact article title. Since the schema provides no descriptions for these parameters, this textual explanation fully compensates and adds critical meaning.

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 that the tool retrieves the full wikitext of a Ragnarok Online reference page from either irowiki or fandom. It specifies the specific resource and the action, distinguishing it from sibling tools that provide summaries or search results.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_ro_reference_summary or search_ro_reference. Usage is only implied by the stated purpose, with no exclusions or alternative context.

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