Fetch Gemini resource

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

The description provides rich behavioral context beyond annotations: protocol details, TLS handling, TOFU validation, gemtext parsing, input handling, and LLM-optimized output. Annotations declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, which align with a read-only fetch operation.

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 efficiently structured with a clear topic sentence, protocol details, and parameter explanations. It uses a succinct bullet-like format (with 'Args:') and no redundant information.

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 has an output schema, so return value explanation is unnecessary. The description covers all essential aspects: protocol, authentication, input handling, and output format. It is fully sufficient for correct usage.

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 description adds meaningful detail to both parameters: url usage is clarified with protocol context, and input is explained with percent-encoding and query replacement. Schema coverage is 100%, but the description enhances understanding beyond the schema comments.

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 fetches Gemini content by URL, specifying protocol support (TLS, TOFU, client certificates, gemtext parsing) and structured JSON output. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like gemini_batch_fetch and gopher_fetch by focusing on single resource fetches.

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 explains typical usage, including handling of input prompts via the 'input' parameter. While it doesn't explicitly list when not to use it versus siblings, the protocol and single-resource nature make the usage context clear.

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