para_get

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

With readOnlyHint:true, the safety profile is clear. The description adds some behavioral context by detailing what is returned (text, style, formatting, layout) and clarifying the heading_level semantics. However, it doesn't disclose pagination behavior despite having limit and cursor parameters, nor does it mention performance or authorization needs.

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, front-loaded sentence that packs in the return payload and a key semantic detail (heading_level values). It is efficient, though the parenthetical could be slightly clearer.

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 read-only tool with no output schema, the description gives a good sense of returned data but omits pagination behavior (limit/cursor) and input prerequisites (e.g., obtaining 'at' from a prior read). These gaps mean an agent might misunderstand how to retrieve large paragraphs or where the address comes from.

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 schema already documents all parameters, including the 'at' address format and pagination cursor/limit. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so baseline 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 states a specific verb ('get') and resource ('one paragraph by address') and enumerates return contents (text, style, direct formatting, formatted spans, layout facts). This distinguishes it from paragraphs_list and other siblings, though it could be more explicit that it retrieves information for a single paragraph.

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?

There is implied usage: it requires a paragraph address ('at'), which suggests it's used after a read result. However, the description doesn't state when to use this tool versus paragraphs_list or table_get, nor does it mention prerequisites or alternatives.

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