Get a Skeleton documentation section

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It accurately states the core read behavior and title-based scoping. However, it does not describe the return format, behavior when a title is not found, or whether the returned section contains nested content. The description is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the operation, the resource, and illustrative examples. There is no wasted wording, and it is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter retrieval tool.

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 tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential selection and invocation needs: what it returns and how to identify the section. The only minor gap is the lack of explicit detail about the returned content or error behavior, but this does not block correct invocation.

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 fully describes the title parameter and its case-insensitivity, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by giving concrete examples of top-level titles ('Accordion', 'Installation', 'Themes'), which helps the agent understand what counts as a valid input.

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 ('Returns') and a specific resource ('official Skeleton documentation section') qualified by top-level title. Concrete examples like 'Accordion', 'Installation', and 'Themes' make the tool's scope unmistakable and clearly distinguish it from the search-oriented sibling.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when you need a specific Skeleton documentation section identified by its exact top-level title. It does not explicitly contrast with search_skeleton_docs or skeleton_svelte_guidance, but the 'specific section by title' framing gives clear context without exclusions.

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