Get Help Center Article

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so safety is covered. The description adds value beyond that by disclosing the return payload (body as HTML, metadata, source_locale, available translations) and the token-cost tradeoff, which the annotations do not express.

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?

Four tight sentences, each earning its place: retrieval scope, routing alternative, locale option, return shape. It is front-loaded with the core action and contains no filler.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description enumerates the return contents (body HTML, metadata, source_locale, translations). Combined with complete parameter coverage and annotation-backed safety, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 in the schema (article_id even names its source tools). The description's note that locale fetches a translated version is a small addition but largely restates the schema's own 'Locale for translated version' text, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (Retrieve) and resource (an article) and clarifies scope: 'by ID with full body content'. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling tools get_article_outline and get_article_section, so an agent can route 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?

Names the alternative tools (get_article_outline + get_article_section) and the exact condition that selects them ('For large articles ... to save tokens'). This is explicit when-to-use/when-to-prefer-alternative guidance, not merely implied context.

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