get_example

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It reveals two key behaviors: version-agnostic matching and fallback to the 'returns: line'. It does not mention auth or rate limits, but for a read-only retrieval tool, 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?

Three sentences, each with a clear role: purpose, version behavior, failure mode. No redundancy or fluff. Excellent front-loading.

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?

The output schema is present (not shown), so return values need not be described. The description covers the primary function, edge cases, and key behavioral nuances. Given low complexity, it is fully complete.

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 only parameter 'path' has 0% schema description coverage. The description references 'endpoint path' but does not specify format, examples, or constraints beyond the property name. Adding semantics like 'expected format: /api/v2/x' would improve clarity.

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 'Return a real captured example response body for an endpoint path,' specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on example retrieval rather than endpoint metadata or documentation 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?

The description explains the version-agnostic slug fallback and the fallback behavior when no example is captured, guiding the agent on expected outcomes. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings but provides context for when the tool succeeds or fails.

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