get_article

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

The description discloses that the tool returns the full HTML body, which is a useful behavioral detail. It also shows a GET method, implying a read-only operation, but with no annotations it does not address auth, rate limits, or error behavior. The description carries only some of the transparency burden.

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 sentence that front-loads the action and resource, followed by the endpoint. Every word earns its place, with no unnecessary elaboration.

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 simplicity—one parameter, an output schema, and a straightforward GET operation—the short description is largely sufficient. It covers the core purpose and response content, though it omits error handling or comparison to search_articles, which would be nice but not essential.

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?

The schema defines article_id as an integer with no description, and the description does not explicitly explain the parameter. However, the endpoint includes {id}, and the parameter name is self-explanatory, so the description adds minimal contextual meaning beyond the schema. For a single obvious parameter, this is adequate.

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 'Get one Help Center article' with a specific verb and resource, and includes the full HTTP endpoint. It distinguishes itself from search_articles by specifying a single article by ID, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage when you have a specific article ID, and the endpoint reinforces that. However, it does not explicitly contrast with search_articles or state when not to use this tool, so guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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