get-markdown-file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: it's a read operation ('Get'), requires an existing file, and accesses the server filesystem. However, it lacks details on error handling, permissions, or return format, leaving gaps for a tool with no annotations.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It front-loads the purpose and key constraints, making it easy to parse and understand quickly.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate for a simple read tool but incomplete. It covers the basic operation and constraints, but lacks details on what is returned (e.g., file content, metadata) or error cases, which are important for a tool with no structured output information.

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 schema already documents the 'filepath' parameter fully. The description adds minimal value by reinforcing it's an 'absolute file path' and 'on the server filesystem', but does not provide additional syntax or format details 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 specific action ('Get') and resource ('a markdown file'), and distinguishes it from siblings by specifying it retrieves existing files from the server filesystem, unlike conversion tools like 'docx-to-markdown' or web tools like 'fetch'.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool ('by absolute file path' and 'file must exist on the server filesystem'), but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives among the siblings, such as 'fetch' for remote content or conversion tools for other formats.

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