Get API Documentation

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

Annotations already classify this as read-only and idempotent. The description adds important behavioral detail beyond annotations: each named section returns only the primary list/create endpoint and excludes related sub-resources, which meaningfully affects how the result should be interpreted.

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 compact and well-structured: it states the purpose first, lists valid sections, then explains the key limitation and remedy. Every sentence contributes useful information with no repetition of schema or annotations.

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 the simple single-parameter interface, the description fully covers what the tool does, what sections are available, what each section returns, and how to get broader coverage. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to call it correctly.

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 input schema already documents the 'section' parameter and suggests 'index'/'full'. The description provides additional value by enumerating valid section names and explaining the scope of each section, which substantially enhances the agent's ability to choose a correct 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's function: looking up the Service Fusion API reference, with an explicit list of available sections. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools because it targets documentation rather than domain operations like jobs or customers.

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 gives concrete guidance: use 'index' to see valid sections and 'full' when sub-resource or {id}-endpoint detail is needed. It doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools, but its role as a documentation lookup is clear enough that an agent can decide when it is appropriate.

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