get_documentation_page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations: it specifies the source ('UAB Research Computing GitHub repository'), content format ('markdown'), and that it fetches 'complete' content, which helps the agent understand behavioral traits like data source and output type.

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?

Well-structured with a clear purpose statement, usage guideline, parameter details, and return value—all in four concise sentences. Each sentence adds value: the first states the action, the second adds source context, the third provides usage guidance, and the fourth and fifth detail parameters and returns efficiently.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, no nested objects), rich annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and presence of an output schema (so returns needn't be explained in description), the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage, parameter semantics, and source context adequately for the agent to select and invoke the tool 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides detailed semantics for the single parameter page_path: explains what it represents ('path to the documentation page'), gives examples (e.g., 'docs/cheaha/slurm/slurm_tutorial.md'), and clarifies format options ('relative path from the repository root or a GitHub URL'), adding significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 specific action ('Retrieve the full content'), target resource ('specific documentation page'), and format ('complete markdown content'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by specifying it fetches content after finding pages with the search tool, unlike list_documentation_sections which lists sections or search_documentation which searches.

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 states when to use this tool ('Use this after finding a relevant page with the search tool'), providing clear context and distinguishing it from search_documentation. It implies alternatives by referencing the search tool for initial discovery.

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