read_official_doc

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses key constraints: bounded slice, allowlisted domains, heading-based section extraction, and a max_chars cap at 20000. However, it does not specify behavior on error cases (e.g., invalid URL, missing heading) nor the return format.

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 two sentences, front-loading the purpose. Every sentence adds value: the first states the primary action, the second adds constraints and optional parameter behavior. No unnecessary words.

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?

Despite three parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description leaves significant gaps: no explanation of return type (text, HTML?), no error handling guidance, and no clarification of 'bounded slice' (character count, page boundaries?). The description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaningful context for 'heading' (returns just that section) and 'max_chars' (capped at 20000 to protect context budget). However, it does not detail the 'url' parameter beyond being a required field.

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 returns a bounded slice of an indexed official documentation page. It distinguishes from sibling tools (docs_status checks status, search_official_docs searches for pages) by focusing on reading a specific page.

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?

The description implies usage for reading official documentation pages but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like search_official_docs or docs_status. No exclusions or conditional guidance are provided.

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