Atlas Get Reference

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context the annotations don't: index-by-default behavior and the argument-repetition protocol across paginated calls.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and content list, followed by the default-call rule and a compact example. No filler, and the most important guidance arrives first.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-format explanation is unnecessary. Between the description (what the reference covers, index default, pagination protocol) and the schema (topic enum, portal constraints), an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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, but the description adds real value beyond it: a concrete example pairing topic and item_id, and the non-obvious pagination rule that on subsequent pages you repeat only topic and (for guides) portal.

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 (read) and resource (the server's reference) and enumerates exactly what that reference contains: capabilities, portals, guides, SoQL help, errors, tiers. This clearly distinguishes it from the dataset-oriented siblings (atlas_query_dataset, atlas_search_datasets, atlas_find_portals).

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?

Gives concrete invocation guidance: no arguments yields the index, and a worked example shows topic/item_id usage. It stops short of routing the agent away from overlaps with atlas_find_portals (topic=portals) or atlas_describe_dataset, so usage is clear but not fully disambiguated.

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