Get Documentation

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds behavioral context: fetching strategy (prioritizes llms.txt, then Jina Reader, then GitHub README) and proprietary data usage restrictions. No contradiction with annotations.

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 six sentences, mostly efficient. It front-loads the core purpose and prerequisite. The proprietary data notice is necessary but slightly long. Overall well-structured and not verbose.

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 has 5 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, prerequisite, usage limits, data restrictions, and parameter nuances. It fully addresses the agent's decision needs.

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% (baseline 3). The description adds value by explaining the topic should be specific, and that setting projectPath enables auto-detection of version from lockfiles. It also provides examples for libraryId format.

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 up-to-date documentation for any library or framework', providing a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning the prerequisite call to gt_resolve_library, setting clear expectations.

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 provides explicit workflow: 'Call gt_resolve_library first to get the libraryId, then pass it here with your topic.' It also gives a usage limit ('Do not call this tool more than 3 times per question'). However, it does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives like gt_search, so slightly less than perfect.

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