get_doc_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden: it discloses read semantics, Markdown output, offset-based pagination, and a max_chars range of 1,000–50,000. It doesn't cover rate limits or error behavior for invalid slugs/versions, but the key behavioral traits for a docs reader are present.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by usage routing and a compact Args list that is necessary given the empty schema descriptions. No wasted sentences.

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?

An output schema exists so return format needn't be explained, and all four zero-description parameters are documented well enough to call correctly. Only error behavior and version-discovery via list_versions are left implicit.

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 compensate, and it does fully: every one of the four parameters is explained with meaning, example slug formats, allowed version values ('current', 'devel', '18', '9.6'), and max_chars bounds.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read one page from the official PostgreSQL documentation as Markdown') and names the sibling that produces the required input ('page slug returned by search_docs'). An agent can distinguish it immediately from search_docs and list_versions.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to search_docs for slugs and explains the continuation pattern for long pages via offset. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or mention list_versions, but the usage context is clear.

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