get_fastapi_best_practices

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description does not add any behavioral details beyond what annotations convey, such as the nature of the combined content or any limitations. It is neutral and non-contradictory.

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, well-formed sentence that immediately conveys the action and scope. Every word is necessary; there is no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description provides the core purpose. It could mention the output format (e.g., returns a text block), but the agent can infer from the tool name and context. It is mostly complete.

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 describes the 'topic' parameter with examples. The description mentions 'matching a topic' but adds no new semantics beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, a baseline score 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 uses a specific verb 'Combine' and a clear resource 'best-practice content from all doc pages matching a topic'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'get_fastapi_docs' which retrieves a single page, and 'search_fastapi_docs' which may return snippets. The scope is well-defined.

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?

The description implies usage when one needs an aggregated view of best practices on a topic, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools for similar tasks. For example, it doesn't contrast with 'search_fastapi_docs' for broader searches.

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