Get a test page

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

The description merely restates that the tool reads HTML, which is already implied by the readOnlyHint annotation. It does not disclose error behavior, authentication requirements, or what happens if the page is not found.

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 extremely concise (one sentence, 6 words) and front-loaded, but it sacrifices useful detail. It earns a high score for brevity but not for completeness.

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 read-by-name tool, the description is borderline adequate. It lacks details on return format (HTML), error handling, and required permissions. Given no output schema, the description should provide more context.

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%, meaning no parameter details are provided in the schema. The description mentions 'by name' but does not explain what 'name' and 'project' parameters represent or their expected formats.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and explicitly mentions the resource ('test page's HTML'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_test_pages, save_test_page, and remove_test_page.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as list_test_pages for listing all pages or save_test_page for creating/modifying. A simple one-line purpose is insufficient for usage context.

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