Read a full blog article

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the exact payload (title, publish date, summary, full body), the HTML-to-text conversion with headings/lists/links preserved, the canonical URL, and the not-found behavior for unknown slugs. It omits auth or rate-limit context, but for a public read tool that is a minor gap.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the verb, resource, and required input key before describing the return payload and edge case. No 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?

No output schema exists, so the description usefully specifies the return contents and the not-found case, and the single parameter is fully documented in the schema. An agent has everything needed to call it and interpret the result.

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 there is a single required slug parameter whose schema description already says it is discovered via list_articles or search_refined_element_knowledge. The description repeats that guidance without adding format or syntax detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Read one full Refined Element blog article by slug') with explicit scope ('one full ... article'), which cleanly separates it from the list/search siblings. An agent can tell it fetches a single article body rather than a collection.

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?

Gives clear context: slugs come from list_articles or search_refined_element_knowledge, so the agent knows the retrieval path. It stops short of stating when not to use this tool (e.g., versus get_paid_playbook), so it is strong but not fully routing-complete.

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