get_chapter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It mentions pagination via offset/nextOffset, which is useful, but does not disclose behavior when both number and title are provided, or when neither is provided. It also lacks details on error handling or text formatting.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and immediately followed by the pagination detail. No wasted words; 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?

Despite having no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the basic retrieval functionality and pagination. However, it lacks information on required parameters (none required, but likely number or title should be supplied), conflict resolution when both are given, and case sensitivity of title matching. This leaves room for ambiguity.

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 input schema already provides clear descriptions for all 3 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema: it confirms the range for number and that offset is used for pagination. This is adequate but does not significantly augment the schema.

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 clearly states the tool returns a chapter's verbatim text, specifying the two identification methods (number or title substring). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like list_chapters, which lists chapters, and search_content, which searches across content.

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 usage via number or title but does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over siblings, nor does it mention when not to use it. For example, it doesn't clarify that get_chapter is for retrieving full text while list_chapters is for listing titles.

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