Read a page

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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe, idempotent read operation, so the description is not required to explain safety. It does add useful behavior beyond the annotations: output is Markdown, and selecting a section includes the sections beneath it. It leaves out error behavior for missing pages or sections and any size limits.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the core action and the main variant immediately.

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 read-only annotations, complete parameter schema, and no output schema, the definition is mostly complete. However, it does not say what happens when a page or section is missing, whether large pages are truncated, or how section paths are matched.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline would be 3. The description exceeds that by clarifying what the section parameter does: it returns that section together with the sections under it, which the schema does not state.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it reads one page of the docs as Markdown, or a section of that page. This clearly separates it from list_docs and search_docs, though it does not explicitly distinguish it from read_endpoint or read_shape.

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?

Usage is implied by the contrast between reading a whole page and reading a section, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of list_docs or search_docs. The agent must infer the selection criteria.

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