Get GOV.UK Page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description does not need to repeat safety traits. The description adds value by detailing the output structure (title, dates, sections), which helps the agent understand what the tool does without needing to consult the output schema. No behavioral contradictions with annotations.

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?

Two sentences: first sentence states purpose, second enumerates return values and directs to alternatives. No wasted words; every sentence earns its place.

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 presence of an output schema (as indicated by context signals), the description adequately covers the return values and tool behavior. It also references sibling tools for further actions, making it self-contained for an agent to decide whether to use this tool or another.

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% with a single parameter (base_path) already described in the schema. The description does not add any additional semantics or usage details for the parameter beyond what is in the schema, 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 clearly states the tool retrieves metadata and a navigable section index for a GOV.UK page using the specific verb 'Get'. It distinguishes from siblings like govuk_get_section and govuk_grep_content by specifying the returned data (section index vs. body content).

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?

Explicitly tells when to use alternatives: 'Use govuk_get_section to read the body of a specific section, or govuk_grep_content to search within the page body.' This provides clear guidance on tool selection.

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