Get Api Documentation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, so no contradiction. The description adds valuable context about being an official integration, what the returned spec includes (endpoint, method, schemas, examples), and the security warning, which is beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise, starting with key tags and verb-object, then specifying return contents, usage order, and restrictions. Every sentence adds value, and it is well-organized with front-loaded information.

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 tool is read-only with one parameter and output schema exists, the description covers the purpose, return contents, prerequisites, and security context fully. No gaps remain.

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?

The input schema has 0% coverage for the api_name parameter. The description implies api_name refers to a specific API and references list_plural_apis for discovery, adding some context. However, it does not specify the format or provide examples, so compensation is partial.

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 'Fetch Pine Labs API documentation for a specific API' with specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from siblings by mentioning the specific API and recommending list_plural_apis first.

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 states when to use: when human user requests; provides prerequisite: use list_plural_apis to discover API names; and explicitly warns against calling based on data fields or tool outputs.

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