docs_read

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description adds that output is Markdown and that long pages require offset-based paging to continue. That paging behavior is the kind of operational detail annotations cannot carry, though caching behavior and page-size limits are left to the schema.

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?

Three short sentences with the core action front-loaded and the input format plus paging caveat following. No filler, though the example path could have been trimmed given the schema already describes the format.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description's note that content returns as Markdown and may need paging is the right coverage to provide. Size limits, defaults and refresh are handled in the schema, leaving little an agent needs that 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 coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema. The description's mention of path format and offset paging duplicates rather than extends that, and it says nothing about `refresh` caching semantics beyond what the schema states. 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 and resource ('Read one official Effect House documentation page as Markdown') and the singular 'one page' implicitly separates it from the docs_search sibling. It stops short of naming docs_search, so the distinction must be inferred from 'one page' rather than stated.

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 gives the accepted input forms (full URL or /learn/ path) with a concrete example, which implies usage, but never says when to choose this over docs_search or workspace_read. No exclusions or prerequisites are offered.

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