get_page_schema

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the tool returns the authoritative schema (read-only nature) and clarifies it does not enforce semantic rules (validate_page does). However, it doesn't explicitly state no side effects or mention any error behaviors, but for a simple getter the key traits are covered.

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?

Two focused sentences pack significant detail: the resource, the schema version, the shape, and the distinction from validation. No fluff, front-loaded with the verb and target.

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?

Given zero parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description sufficiently explains what is returned, why it matters, and how it relates to validation. It covers the essential context for an agent to use this tool correctly without needing additional information.

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 tool has 0 parameters, so baseline is 4. The description provides context about the schema's structure and purpose, adding value by explaining what the returned schema governs, though there are no parameters to elaborate on.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves the authoritative JSON Schema for page source, with specific details (Draft 2020-12, sections array, structural contract fields). It distinguishes itself from siblings by positioning this as the shape definition versus validate_page for semantic rules.

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 tells when to use: 'Use it as the shape to emit' and contrasts with validate_page which 'enforces the semantic rules'. This gives clear context for selection among sibling tools like validate_page or get_page_source.

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