Raw Fold3 request

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description adds behavioral detail beyond annotations: it lists allowed endpoint prefixes and the POST DocumentQuery action, and implies that raw requests bypass the filtering/projection of the other tools, which is important context for safe use.

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 with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the routing advice ('prefer other tools') follows logically. Every sentence 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 raw-access fallback with open-world semantics and no output schema, the description covers the essential usage constraints (allowed paths, methods, documentation reference, and the caveat about raw results). An agent can safely decide when to call this tool and how to construct a request.

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% (all parameters described), so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema: it explains that POST is used for a DocumentQuery, ties the path to specific prefixes, and implies that body is only for POST, which complements the schema's brief descriptions.

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 ('request'), resource (Fold3 services), and allowed paths/methods. Clearly distinguishes from siblings by saying it provides 'data the other tools lack' and explicitly naming the alternative tools in the preference note.

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?

Explicitly says 'Prefer the other tools' and explains why (projected results, checked filters), indicating when NOT to use this tool. Also points to docs/endpoints.md for useful paths, giving an actionable guide for correct usage.

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