OpenEvidence Conversation Page Get

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

No annotations provided; description carries full burden. Discloses that it parses into Q&A turns (question, answer as markdown, references) and specifies authentication requirements (public vs private). Lacks explicit read-only declaration but 'Read' implies it.

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?

Extremely concise: three sentences covering purpose, setup, and alternative. No redundant information. Front-loaded with primary action.

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?

With no output schema, description explains output format (Q&A turns with markdown and references). Covers prerequisites and distinguishes from sibling. Minor gap: no explanation of strip_citation_markers behavior.

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 coverage is 50% (url described, strip_citation_markers not). Description adds context on URL format and output type but does not explain the boolean parameter strip_citation_markers, leaving it unclear.

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?

Clearly states it reads an OpenEvidence conversation from an /ask/<id> link and parses it into Q&A turns. Distinguishes from sibling oe_article_get which retrieves raw API payload.

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 explains when to use vs not: 'Use oe_article_get when you want the raw API payload + saved artifacts instead.' Also details setup needs for public vs private conversations.

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