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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that the profile is public, enumerates always-present fields, and explains which fields depend on paid plans/provider status. It does not discuss errors or rate limits, but for a read-only lookup by UUID, the most important behavioral constraints 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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and uses compact, scannable lists for return fields. Every sentence contributes: purpose, standard fields, paid-plan conditionals, and sibling routing. No filler or redundancy.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must explain return values, and it does: always-present fields, paid-plan-only fields, and plan-dependent description. It also names the sibling for services. For a one-parameter UUID lookup, this is complete enough for an agent to call and interpret the result.

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 100% and the single 'id' parameter already has a description ('The UUID of the business to look up'). The tool description only repeats 'by UUID' and adds no extra meaning, format details, or example values, so it neither helps nor hurts beyond 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get the public Bezal profile for one business by UUID.' It lists exactly what is returned and explicitly routes service-related lookups to get_service_catalog, making the tool's purpose and boundary clear.

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 gives an explicit alternative ('For services, use get_service_catalog') and implies this tool is for business profile lookup by UUID. It does not mention when to prefer search_businesses or get_provider_details, so the routing guidance is helpful but not exhaustive.

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