Read a documentation page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds real context beyond that by disclosing the output format (Markdown) and the three accepted id forms. It omits failure behavior for a missing id and any note on large pages being truncated, which would matter for a fetch tool.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and format, followed by accepted inputs and the optional narrowing parameter. Every clause carries information; nothing is redundant with the title or schema.

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 two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and read-only annotations, this is nearly complete: input forms, output format, and section extraction are all covered, and no output schema exists to require return-value explanation. The only gap is error/not-found behavior and size limits on large pages.

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 the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: worked examples for all three id formats ('marko:reference/core-tag', a full URL, and a bare slug) and a clarification that `section` returns only that heading's content rather than filtering the whole page.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read a Marko or evo-web documentation page') plus the return format ('as Markdown'). It also names the sibling tools that supply valid ids (search_docs/list_docs), so an agent can separate this fetch tool from the discovery tools without opening either schema.

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?

It implies the correct workflow by saying to pass an id 'from search_docs/list_docs', which tells the agent to discover first and fetch second. It also gives a concrete narrowing option ('Use `section` to return only one heading's content'). It does not say what to do when an id is unknown or when to prefer search_docs over a direct slug guess, so it stops short of explicit when-not guidance.

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