Get SS6 Documentation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions the dependency on list-sections, which is useful. However, it does not disclose details about return format, error behavior, or what happens if the section ID is invalid, leaving some ambiguity.

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-loaded with the primary action, and includes a critical usage hint. Every word is purposeful with no fluff or repetition.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: what it does and the required precursor. It does not explain the return value, but given the simplicity of fetching documentation, this is a minor gap and the description remains largely complete.

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 input schema already provides full coverage of the 'section' parameter with a clear description and example. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema documents, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 fetches Silverstripe 6 changelog documentation for a specific section, with a specific verb 'fetches' and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search-changelog and list-sections by focusing on retrieving a documented section rather than listing or searching.

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?

It provides explicit guidance to call list-sections first, establishing a required prerequisite. It doesn't explicitly mention when not to use this tool or contrast with alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to understand when to invoke it.

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