help

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

The description adds valuable context beyond what annotations provide. While annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, the description clarifies that this tool provides 'full documentation' when regular descriptions are insufficient. This adds meaningful behavioral context about the tool's purpose and output.

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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each serve distinct purposes: the first states what the tool does, the second provides usage guidance. There's zero wasted language and it's front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 simple purpose (retrieving documentation), single parameter with full schema coverage, and comprehensive annotations, the description is mostly complete. However, it doesn't describe what format the 'full documentation' returns (e.g., markdown, HTML, plain text), which would be helpful since there's no output schema.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already fully documents the single parameter 'tool_name' with its enum values. The description doesn't add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so the 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?

The description clearly states the specific action ('Get full documentation') and resource ('for a tool'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'messages', 'folders', 'attachments', and 'send' which perform different operations. It explicitly defines its unique purpose in the tool ecosystem.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'Use when compressed descriptions are insufficient.' This clearly differentiates it from the default tool descriptions and provides a specific trigger condition for its usage.

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