get_documentation_page

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only mild context by stating the result is 'full documentation content and guides,' but does not disclose return format, pagination, or any other behavioral traits.

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 sentence that front-loads the verb and object, with no redundant filler. Every word contributes to explaining what the tool does.

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, read-only retrieval tool with a closed enum and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. It could be more complete by saying the output is the page content rather than a summary, and by distinguishing itself from search_docs.

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%, and the slug parameter has a full enum of valid values plus a basic description, so the schema carries the meaning. The description's phrase 'specific platform topic' loosely maps to slug but adds no additional parameter semantics.

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 a clear verb and resource: it retrieves full documentation content for a specific platform topic, which is distinct from a vague search action. However, it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling search_docs, so the differentiation is left mostly to the tool name and schema.

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 is for fetching a known documentation page rather than searching for one, but it never states when to prefer this tool over search_docs or search_knowledge_base. No exclusions or explicit alternative routing are provided.

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