Get GitLab doc

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and idempotent; the description adds that the response is the page's full Markdown content rather than a summary or search snippet. This clarifies output granularity and format beyond what the safety annotations convey.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the key action and resource, with no filler or redundant explanation. Every word contributes to selecting or invoking the tool.

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 single-required-parameter read tool with an output schema and safety annotations, the description plus schema fully covers what an agent needs: what to fetch, how to identify the page, and that it is read-only/idempotent. No missing prerequisite or postcondition creates ambiguity.

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 coverage is 100% and the sole parameter, path, is already described as the exact document path from search results. The description only repeats 'by path' and does not add formatting, encoding, or alternate-source guidance, so it stays at the baseline for a fully documented schema.

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?

States a specific verb ('fetch'), resource ('full markdown content of a single documentation page'), and method ('by path'). This clearly distinguishes it from the search-oriented siblings search_docs and search_and_fetch, which find or combine docs rather than retrieving one known page.

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 and path parameter make the usage context clear: call this when you already have the exact document path, which the schema says comes from search results. It does not explicitly name when-not-to-use conditions or alternatives, but the intended flow is easily inferred.

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