get_directive_content

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

Description goes beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint) by revealing internal steps: resolves md_file_path from database, reads file, returns content plus absolute path and token estimate. No contradictions with 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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. 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?

Despite no output schema, the description explicitly lists return fields (content, absolute path, token estimate). The parameter is single and simple, and the tool's purpose is fully covered.

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% with a clear parameter description. The tool description adds context about how the parameter is used (resolving path) but does not add new constraints 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?

Description clearly states the action ('Read and return the full MD documentation file') and the resource ('for a directive'). It specifies the output content, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'get_directive_by_name' which likely returns metadata.

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?

Description implies when to use: when you need the full markdown documentation content. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, such as 'get_directive_by_name' for metadata-only retrieval.

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