get_endpoint

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries no additional behavioral context. It doesn't mention what the returned documentation contains, any prerequisites, or limitations. Still, it doesn't contradict annotations.

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 extremely short (five words in Russian), with no wasted words, but it's also under-specified, providing minimal value beyond the name. It is concise but not effectively structured to help the agent.

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 tool with one parameter, no output schema, and minimal annotations, the description should explain what documentation is returned and in what form, but it only states 'Documentation on the API method.' This is insufficient to understand the tool's output or behavior.

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 schema description for name_or_path is complete (100% coverage), explaining it is a method name or URL part with an example. The tool description adds no parameter semantics, but the schema covers it, so baseline 3 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 'Документация по методу API.' indicates the tool provides documentation for an API method, but it is vague: it doesn't specify that it retrieves documentation for a given endpoint name/path, nor distinguish from sibling tools like list_endpoints or search_docs. It is more than a tautology but lacks specificity.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use get_endpoint versus alternatives such as list_endpoints or search_docs. The description contains no usage context or exclusions.

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