Get esa Markdown syntax documentation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds that the content is esa-specific extensions and formatting options, but says nothing about the shape of the returned documentation or whether it is static reference material versus live content. Modest added value over 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?

Two sentences, no filler, with the purpose front-loaded and the pre-requisite call ordering in the second sentence. Every clause 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 zero-parameter, read-only documentation tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns (Markdown syntax, esa extensions, formatting options) and when to fetch it. Only a hint about the documentation's scope or format is absent, which is minor at this complexity.

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 there is no parameter semantics to convey; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly implies a parameterless, side-effect-free lookup rather than misleading the agent into expecting filters.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (esa Markdown and formatting documentation) and clearly distinguishes itself from the data-mutating siblings by being a documentation-lookup tool. An agent can tell what it returns without opening any 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?

Explicitly prescribes when to call it ('BEFORE using any tools with *_md parameters') and enumerates the exact siblings that consume the syntax knowledge (esa_create_post, esa_update_post, esa_create_comment, esa_update_comment). The conditional trigger ('if you need clarification') is also spelled out, leaving nothing to inference.

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