GetItemContent

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds behavioral context they cannot: a hard rate limit of 20 full-text fetches per minute and chunked Markdown output. It does not describe pagination termination beyond the schema's next_offset hint, so it stops just short of fully rich disclosure.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with what the tool returns and immediately followed by the constraint that governs its use. No filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. The description covers format, chunking, the rate limit, and routing to cheaper siblings, leaving nothing an agent needs to call it 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 100%, so item_id, offset, and max_chars are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces chunking and max_chars but adds no syntax or constraint detail beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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+resource+format: 'Get an item's full text as Markdown, in chunks of up to max_chars.' It also distinguishes itself from siblings by naming ListItems and GetItem as the lighter excerpt alternatives, so an agent can tell it apart without opening the schema.

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 names the alternative tools (ListItems, GetItem) and the condition that selects them ('use excerpts ... when they're enough'), plus the rate-limit constraint that motivates restraint. Both when-to-use and when-not-to-use are covered.

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