get-standard-docs

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it only mentions the prerequisite and does not disclose what 'detailed content' includes, how the topic filter or maxTokens affect results, any return format, or error scenarios. For a get operation, more details would be expected.

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 a single sentence that conveys the purpose and a key prerequisite without any fluff. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and effectively front-loaded.

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 there is no output schema, the parameter schema is fully covered, and the tool's complexity is low. The description provides the crucial prerequisite context. However, it could add a brief note on what the returned content looks like or how topic filtering behaves, but the current level is adequate given the schema richness.

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?

All three parameters have descriptions in the schema, providing 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but the schema already explains each parameter sufficiently, so the baseline of 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 clearly states the verb and resource: get detailed content of a specified standard document. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying that the standard ID must first be obtained from resolve-standard-id, which differentiates its role from the sibling 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?

Provides an explicit prerequisite: must use resolve-standard-id first to get the standard ID. This gives clear context for when to use the tool and implies the ID resolution step, though it does not explicitly mention list-standards as an alternative for discovering standards.

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