Belge HTML Çıktısı

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It does not mention side effects, authentication requirements, error behavior, or whether the operation is read-only. The minimal description 'returns HTML output' is insufficient for behavioral transparency.

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 concise with one sentence and no wasted words. It is front-loaded but could be slightly expanded to add value without being verbose.

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?

The tool lacks an output schema, and the description does not explain the output format (e.g., raw HTML, encoded, size limits) or provide context on when to prefer this over gib_get_document. For a data-returning tool, completeness is low.

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%, so baseline 3 applies. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain the role of uuid or the meaning of the signed parameter in context.

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 tool returns HTML output of a registered document. The verb 'getirir' (returns) and resource 'belgenin HTML çıktısı' (document's HTML output) are specific. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like gib_get_document or gib_get_download_url.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no excluded scenarios. The description only states the basic function.

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