get_guide

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds that the guide includes quick answer, FAQs, related guides, and canonical URL, and that the title match can be approximate, giving insight into matching behavior and response contents.

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?

Single sentence is very concise, front-loaded with the verb and resource, and every phrase adds value. No unnecessary words.

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 simple retrieval tool, the description covers identification and response contents. Given no output schema, listing the guide's components is adequate. Annotations cover the safety profile, and schema covers the language parameter. Minor omission of error/ambiguity behavior, but not critical.

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?

The schema provides a description for 'lang' but not for 'slug'. The description clarifies that 'slug' can be an approximate title, adding meaning beyond the raw schema field. This compensates for the 50% schema coverage.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('one guide'), and the identifying method ('by slug or approximate title'). It also enumerates the guide's contents, distinguishing it from sibling tools like search_guides which search multiple guides.

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 specifies the input condition ('by slug or approximate title') and the singular nature of the result, making it clear when this tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclusion criteria, but the context is well-defined.

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