get_gib_ozelge_document_markdown

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, indicating safe re-execution. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the output is paginated in 5000-char chunks and includes specific metadata (title, reference number, date, law).

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the purpose, parameters, output format, and key constraints without any redundant text.

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 simple schema, rich annotations, and existence of an output schema, the description covers the main behavioral aspects (pagination, metadata). It does not mention error handling or prerequisites like requiring an ID from search, but the overall context is sufficient for an agent.

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% with clear descriptions for both parameters. The tool description does not add additional semantics beyond confirming the ID is numeric and pagination is 1-indexed, which is already in 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 the tool retrieves the full text of a GİB özelge by numeric ID and returns paginated Markdown with metadata. It uses a specific verb ('Retrieve'), identifies the resource, and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_bddk_document_markdown.

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 the tool should be used after obtaining an ID from search results (as stated in the parameter description for ozelge_id), but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_gib_ozelge or other document retrieval tools.

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