Get AsyncAPI Spec Section

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It does not specify return format (e.g., markdown text), error handling for missing headings, or whether it is read-only. The behavioral details are insufficient.

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 sentence with no fluff. The description front-loads the key action and resource, making it efficient and clear.

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 simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description covers the core purpose. However, it lacks details on return format and error behavior, which are needed for full completeness without annotations.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra context (e.g., 'latest from master') but mainly restates schema info. No significant value added beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Return', the resource 'one section from the latest AsyncAPI markdown specification', and the mechanism 'by heading text or slug'. It distinctively differentiates from sibling tools like get_asyncapi_spec_metadata or search_asyncapi_spec.

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 explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives. The description implies use when a specific section is needed by heading, but lacks exclusion criteria or comparisons with other tools.

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