text_get

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying the HTTP method (GET) and explaining what texts contain. It also provides a practical tip for locating the text_id. No contradictions 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?

Three concise sentences: purpose+endpoint, resource explanation, and id location guidance. No unnecessary words, front-loaded with essential info.

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 simple read tool with strong annotations, the description covers retrieval and id source. It lacks mention of response format or error handling, but these are implicit for a GET operation. Adequate but not exhaustive.

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 explain parameters. It adds meaning for text_id (integer, sourced from content areas) but does not describe the 'site' parameter at all. This partial compensation warrants a low score.

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 action (get), the resource (text resource by id), and includes the HTTP endpoint. It explicitly distinguishes the tool's purpose from siblings by specifying it retrieves text-type content areas.

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 guidance on how to find the text_id via a specific path, which implies the prerequisite step. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool vs. other get tools (e.g., article_get), though the context is implied.

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