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

Annotations already convey read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context by specifying the output is markdown text and that only one scoped document is returned, thereby complementing the annotations rather than restating them.

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 tight sentence delivers the resource, scope, output format, and typical use cases. Nothing is padded or repeated, and the most important information (returning a scoped document) is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity — one enum parameter, no nested objects, and no output schema — the description sufficiently covers what it returns and when to use it. The agent can call it correctly without additional context.

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 schema fully describes the single doc parameter with an enum and description. The description enriches it by naming what the documents cover (pricing, comparisons, auth, API, product), so an agent has extra context beyond the schema without being redundant.

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 states a specific action ('Return') and resource ('Mana agent document') with a clear scoping constraint ('one', 'scoped') and output format ('markdown text'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling list_mana_agent_docs by explicitly returning a single doc rather than listing them.

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 explicitly identifies when to use this tool ('for pricing, comparisons, auth, API, or full product context'), which maps directly to the enum values. It does not explicitly contrast with list_mana_agent_docs, but the 'one scoped document' wording clearly implies the alternative for retrieving a single doc.

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