help

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

The description is consistent with the annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, not destructive) and adds no further behavioral context. It confirms that the tool retrieves documentation, but does not elaborate on aspects like response format or limits. Given that annotations already cover the safety profile, this is adequate.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that efficiently convey purpose and usage guidance. There is no redundant or unnecessary text, making it well-structured and front-loaded.

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 help tool with one enum parameter, the description adequately covers the purpose and usage context. It does not specify the return format, but that is often implied for documentation tools. Overall, it is complete enough given the tool's simplicity and supporting annotations.

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 already provides a complete description of the parameter with an enum and description 'Tool to get documentation for'. The tool description adds no additional meaning to the parameter, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 that the tool provides full documentation for a given tool, with a specific verb ('documentation') and resource ('tool'). It hints at a distinction from compressed descriptions, but could be more explicit about what 'full documentation' entails.

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 explicitly states 'Use when compressed descriptions are insufficient,' providing clear guidance on when to use this tool. While it does not list alternatives, the context implies that sibling tools have compressed descriptions, making this guideline effective.

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