fetch_doc

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It discloses that the tool returns different payloads depending on mode, that small documents are returned fully, that the URI must be under a specific domain, and that errors are returned as dicts. It could mention potential rate limits or loading behavior, but overall it is quite transparent.

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 well-structured with clear sections for modes, workflow, args, and returns. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value. Front-loading with the main purpose is good. Minor room for trimming, but effective.

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 complexity (three modes) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: modes, workflow, parameter usage, small document handling, URL constraint, and error return. It is comprehensive and leaves no major gaps.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description explains both parameters in detail: what happens when uri is omitted (catalog), when section is omitted (TOC), and how section IDs like '3.2' work. It also specifies the URI constraint (must be under https://docs.aisecurity.f5.com/).

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 tool's purpose: 'Read F5 AI Security documentation pages with smart sectioning.' It describes three distinct modes (catalog, TOC, section) and provides a recommended workflow that distinguishes it from the sibling tool search_docs.

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 explicitly explains when to use each mode (e.g., 'Catalog mode (omit uri)' and 'Section mode (uri + section)') and gives a recommended three-step workflow. It also clarifies edge cases like small documents being returned fully.

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