get_section

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, so the read-safety is established. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: it mentions byte-range reads and explicitly states that nested child sections are not included, clarifying the return scope beyond what annotations convey.

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?

Two efficient sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is stated first, then usage guidance, and finally a scope limitation. Every clause adds value.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description clearly states what is returned (full content, own bytes, no nested sections). It covers the core behavior and an important boundary. Additional details about optional parameters are handled by the schema, so the description is sufficiently complete for a read tool.

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 100%, so parameters are fully documented in the schema itself. The description does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, but that is acceptable given the schema's thoroughness.

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 action (Retrieve the full content of a specific section) and the resource (a specific section). It distinguishes from sibling tools by noting that nested child sections are not included, which separates it from tools like get_section_descendants or get_sections.

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 clear usage context by instructing to use after identifying section IDs via search_sections or get_toc. Does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the prerequisite guidance is specific and sufficient for typical workflows.

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