Read LiveDoc as Markdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context beyond that: revision selection behavior, the shape of the returned data, and how embedded Work Items are serialized. It does not mention size limits, truncation, or behavior for very large documents, which would matter for a full-body read.

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, front-loaded with the action and return value, then sibling routing, then prerequisites. No repetition of the title or filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned keys and the Work Item rendering. It covers auth and revision semantics. The main gap is what happens with very large documents (truncation, paging) given openWorldHint, but nothing an agent strictly needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 each parameter is already documented with examples. The description only restates the three required identifiers and notes that revision is optional (already in the schema). Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 and resource (reads a LiveDoc) plus the exact return shape `{markdown, outline}` and how embedded Work Items are rendered. This clearly distinguishes it from `getDocument`, `get_document_outline`, and `read_document_section` without needing to open any schema.

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 says to use this for the full document body and names both alternatives with their selection conditions: `get_document_outline` for headings only, `read_document_section` for a single section. Also states the auth precondition (signed-in user must be able to read the document).

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