Read an Open Play doc page

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

With no annotations, the description usefully discloses the 40,000-character truncation behavior and that a link to the full page is provided. It does not discuss error behavior for invalid ids, permissions, or language fallback, but for a straightforward read tool the key behavioral caveat is covered.

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 tightly written sentences with no wasted wording. The core purpose and the truncation caveat are both front-loaded and easy to scan.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, id provenance, return format, and truncation. The remaining parameter detail is fully handled by the schema, so nothing essential is missing.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented, including the lang enum and default. The description adds a little meaning by giving page id examples and their source, but it does not meaningfully expand on parameter behavior beyond the schema.

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: it returns the full markdown of one documentation page by id. Naming the id source (search_docs or list_docs) and giving example ids makes it clearly distinct from the sibling search/list tools.

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 tells the agent when this tool applies by explaining that page ids come from search_docs or list_docs, which implies the retrieve-after-search workflow. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name an alternative retrieval path, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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