hig_getFetch a specific Apple Human Interface Guidelines page as Markdown. Provide a slug, title, path, or URL to get the content.
Fetch one Human Interface Guidelines page as Markdown. Pass a slug (color, buttons), title, path, or developer.apple.com URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| topic | Yes | Slug, title, path, or URL, e.g. 'buttons', 'designing-for-ios', or '/design/human-interface-guidelines/color' |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, covering safety. The description adds the output format (Markdown) and clarifies accepted input types, which is useful but does not go beyond basics like error behavior, acceptable given the 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?
Two sentences with the core action front-loaded and the input specification clearly stated in the second sentence. No redundant or vague language.
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?
For a single-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does, what it returns, and how to specify the topic. It omits error handling details, but those are minor for this simple scope.
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 schema already describes the topic parameter with examples and coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds mention of developer.apple.com URLs and repeats slug examples, but adds little new semantic meaning beyond the schema.
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 one Human Interface Guidelines page as Markdown', specifying the verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like hig_search or hig_toc, but the purpose is unambiguous.
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 instructs to pass a slug, title, path, or developer.apple.com URL, which guides input usage. However, it does not mention when to use this tool over alternatives, leaving the choice implied (e.g., use when you have a specific page identifier).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.