Get a guide page

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It usefully discloses the output format (Markdown) and gives example path shapes, but says nothing about error behavior for invalid paths, authentication/permission requirements, or whether the guide content is versioned. Adequate but incomplete for an annotation-free 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?

Three short sentences, zero filler, with the core purpose front-loaded and the path-format/routing hints following in priority order. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns (Markdown), the input shape, and how to discover inputs. Only edge-case behavior (invalid path, auth) is absent, which is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.

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 description coverage is 0% — the schema only declares a 1-120 char string — so the description must compensate, and it does by giving concrete path examples ('/receiving/erp-receive-endpoint', '/sdk/pipeline') that reveal the leading-slash hierarchical format. It stops short of stating constraints like the 120-char limit or case sensitivity.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Return one guide page') plus the return format ('as Markdown'), which immediately separates it from content-discovery siblings like list_pages and search_guide. An agent can tell what this tool produces without opening the schema.

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?

It gives explicit routing guidance for one sibling: 'Use list_pages to discover paths,' which tells the agent how to obtain a valid input. It does not address when to prefer search_guide or what to do when a path is unknown, so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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