zeroheight-get-section

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that it retrieves a section, adding no details about side effects, permissions, error behavior, or response format. This is minimal disclosure for a tool without annotation support.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and the relevant section types.

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 low complexity (two required params, one with an enum) and the absence of an output schema, the description is reasonably complete for understanding the tool's basic function. However, it omits return value details and does not mention any prerequisites or exclusions, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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 the baseline is 3. The description mentions the sections in parentheses, but these are already enumerated in the schema. It does not add meaning beyond what the property descriptions already provide.

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 'Get a specific section (design/code/usage/accessibility) for a component' clearly states the action (get), the resource (a section for a component), and the specific types of sections. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-component or get-component-source, which likely retrieve whole components or source code respectively.

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 phrase 'specific section' implies this tool is for retrieving one section rather than the whole component, giving clear context on when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, which keeps it from a 5.

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