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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the bar is lower. The description adds real behavioral value beyond them: it discloses the not-found case ('Returns found=false if unavailable') and what the payload contains (FAQs, source URLs).

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 short sentences, no filler. The primary purpose and lookup key come first, and the failure mode is appended where it is easy to catch.

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 usefully summarizes the return (FAQs, source URLs, found flag), which is exactly what an agent needs for a simple read. The main omission is the undocumented language parameter and any hint about slug format or casing.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It adds one important constraint — the slug must be an exact match, not a fuzzy or partial one — but the 'language' enum parameter (en/zh) is not mentioned at all, leaving half the parameters undocumented anywhere.

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 and resource (get a published tool) plus the lookup key (exact slug), and 'published' scopes it to live entries. It doesn't name search_tools or list_categories as alternatives, but 'by its exact slug' implicitly separates it from browsing/searching siblings.

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?

'by its exact slug' implies you should use this only when you already have a slug, which contrasts with search_tools, but the condition is never stated explicitly and no alternative is named. Usage is inferable rather than spelled out.

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