Get IT Glue Document Section

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds value by disclosing that the content is HTML on the wire and that markdown output converts to plain text, providing transparency about the output format and potential data transformation.

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 is efficient and front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word serves a purpose, and there is no wasted text.

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 presence of an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, scope, and format conversion. It is complete for a retrieval tool with read-only semantics.

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 does not add extra meaning beyond the schema; it only mentions 'full content' which is already implied by the tool's purpose.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'one document section', and the scope 'full content'. It also mentions the format conversion from HTML to markdown/plain text, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'itglue_get_document' or 'itglue_list_document_sections'.

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 for retrieving a single section's full content, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'itglue_list_document_sections' or when not to use it. No exclusion criteria are provided.

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