Read a Pletopay guide

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context by disclosing the return format ('as markdown'), which the annotations and schema do not 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 with zero filler, front-loading the return format and then the key, with the slug provenance in parentheses. Nothing is redundant or misplaced.

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 correctly supplies the return format (markdown), and the enum makes failure modes moot. For a single-parameter read tool this is essentially complete, with only marginal room for more detail.

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% and the single parameter is an enum with an example, so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds only that slugs can come from search_docs, which is minor incremental meaning above the schema baseline.

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 ('Returns one Pletopay guide as markdown') and identifies the lookup key ('by its slug'). It also points at the sibling search_docs as the source of slugs, which helps distinguish the read-one pattern from search, though it stops short of an explicit contrast statement.

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?

Clear implied usage: call this when you already have a slug, and obtain slugs either from search_docs or from the enumerated list. There is no explicit when-not guidance (e.g. 'do not use for listing'), but the routing to search_docs covers the main alternative.

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