preview_single

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It discloses an important side-effect guarantee ('without touching Subset.txt') and the output filename, but it does not say whether the saved PDF overwrites existing files, whether it is temporary, or what permissions are needed.

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 short sentences, with the core action and scope front-loaded and no filler. The output filename detail earns its place.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is serviceable but thin. It gives enough to infer basic invocation, but the meaning of slug and the lifecycle of the generated PDF are left underspecified.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It implies that 'markdown' is raw Markdown content and that 'slug' is used in the output filename, but it never defines what slug identifies or whether it must match an existing resource.

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 ('Preview') and resource ('a single chapter from raw Markdown content'), and distinguishes the tool from siblings by noting it does not touch Subset.txt. This clearly separates it from preview_book and preview_subset.

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?

The description provides clear context for when to use the tool: previewing a single chapter from raw markdown while avoiding changes to Subset.txt. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or list when-not conditions, so it misses full routing guidance.

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