view_landing_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that section bodies and rendered HTML only appear at 'full', and explains the included previewUrl/webUrl fields. It implies a read-only operation via 'fetch' but does not explicitly state non-mutation, though this is acceptable for a fetch tool.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence with semicolon-separated clauses. The purpose is front-loaded, and every clause conveys necessary information without redundancy.

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 2-param tool without an output schema, the description covers the main return variants and their differences. It does not mention error cases or authorization, but these are less critical for a read-based fetch tool.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds significant value by detailing exactly what each detail level returns (e.g., medium = summary + sectionKeys/sectionWordCounts), far exceeding the schema's generic 'Verbosity' phrasing.

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 the specific verb 'Fetch' and resource 'landing page by slug', clearly identifying the operation. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling view tools (like view_lp_draft or view_lp_version), but the purpose is unambiguous without crossing into tautology.

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?

Provides clear guidance on how to choose between 'full', 'medium', and 'short' detail levels, including what fields each returns. It does not mention alternatives to this tool, but the detail-level context is enough for most selection decisions.

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