get_documentation_outline

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool may automatically submit an indexing request and return a waiting state if the repository is not yet indexed. This is valuable behavioral context beyond the basic output, though it could mention rate limits or auth requirements.

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 concise, with two sentences that quickly convey the purpose and an important behavioral note about indexing. It is front-loaded and free of unnecessary 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?

While the description covers the main function and indexing behavior, it lacks details about the output format (e.g., structure of the tree, response fields). Since there is no output schema, more completeness would help the agent understand what to expect. However, it does mention titles, slugs, and hierarchy, providing partial guidance.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage, describing both parameters (repo_path and language) with clear descriptions. The description adds no extra semantic detail beyond confirming the language parameter's purpose, so it meets the baseline.

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 retrieves the complete document directory tree of a repository, listing titles, slugs, and hierarchy. This distinguishes it from siblings like fetch_documentation_page (fetches a specific page) and search_documentation (searches content).

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 mentions automatic indexing behavior on first call, which is useful context, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternatives are provided.

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