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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the Markdown return format, which is beyond the annotations, but says nothing about behavior on an unknown slug or locale fallback.

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?

A single sentence with the action, resource, output format, key parameter and slug source, all front-loaded with zero filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly supplies the return format (Markdown), and both parameters are accounted for between description and schema. Only edge-case behavior (invalid slug, locale fallback) is unstated.

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 only 50%: locale is fully documented in the schema (enum plus default), but slug has no schema description. The description compensates by defining slug as a BeevR article identifier and naming the tools that produce it, covering the gap.

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?

States a specific verb (Get), a precisely scoped resource (one BeevR blog article), the return format (Markdown), and the keying parameter (slug). It clearly distinguishes itself from list_articles and search_beevr, which it names as the sources of the slug.

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?

It gives the upstream workflow explicitly — obtain the slug from list_articles or search_beevr before calling this. It does not state when not to use it or what to do on a missing slug, but the routing context for a single-item fetch is clear.

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