fetch-text-data

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

With no annotations, the description discloses returns up to 100 items and statistics, implying a read operation. However, it lacks explicit statements about non-destructiveness, authentication needs, or rate limits.

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 concise sentences with no filler. Front-loaded with essential information (action, resource, endpoint, limits).

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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains return structure (up to 100 items, statistics) and references API docs for more detail.

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 coverage is 100% and the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's description of namespace_name. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states it lists text and summary chunks from a text-type namespace via a GET endpoint. Differentiates from vector namespaces but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like get-data or search.

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?

Specifies that only text namespaces are supported (a when-not), but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as search or get-data.

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