get_gol_exampleReturns a complete sample goal document in raw markdown, including frontmatter and body with every section, so you can learn the goal format by example.
Return a complete, valid sample goal document as raw markdown -- frontmatter and body -- exercising every section, for use as a learning example.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.36.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden and discloses the return format ('raw markdown -- frontmatter and body') and content scope ('exercising every section'). It does not explicitly state read-only safety or side effects, but the verb 'Return' strongly implies a read 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 a single front-loaded sentence that states the action, output format, content scope, and intended use without any wasted 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?
Given the tool has no parameters, an output schema, and no annotations, the description is complete enough. It explains what the example contains and its learning purpose, leaving return-value details to the output schema.
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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter meaning because none exists, which is appropriate.
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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Return a complete, valid sample goal document as raw markdown.' It also distinguishes this tool from sibling get_gol, get_gol_template, and create_gol by clarifying that the output is a fully populated learning example exercising every section.
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 phrase 'for use as a learning example' gives clear context for when to call this tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended use is unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.