Look up an exact page

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

The description discloses key behavioral constraints: exact 3200-character input and alphabet limitations (a-z, comma, space, period), making it an exact-match operation. However, it does not describe error handling or return format for non-matching text, which would be useful for full transparency.

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 with no fluff. The first sentence states the core function, and the second provides inverse relationship and alternative. Every phrase adds value.

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 one-parameter lookup tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it gives purpose, input constraints, related tools, and an alternative for partial text. The return value (address) is clearly stated, and there are no significant gaps.

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 covers the 'text' parameter with a basic description, but the tool description adds critical semantic constraints: exact length and allowed character set. This goes beyond the schema's 'full page content' and significantly aids correct invocation.

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 states the exact function: given a 3200-character page, return its address. It uses specific verbs (return, lives at) and clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by describing the inverse of get_page and pointing to search_text for partial text.

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 explicit guidance: use for complete exact pages, and explicitly instructs 'For partial text, use search_text instead.' It also implies the relationship with get_page as the inverse operation, giving a clear when-to-use context.

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