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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. Description adds beyond that: it enumerates the returned facets and states the snapshot is versioned, which is non-obvious behavioral context. Doesn't mention pagination or size limits, but adds real value over the annotations.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the read operation and its return facets, then the routing hint. No filler, every sentence earns its place.

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?

A read-only, single-parameter tool with full schema coverage and no output schema. The description compensates for the absent output schema by enumerating returned facets and noting the versioned snapshot, giving the agent enough to call and interpret it. Minor gap: no mention of error/auth behavior.

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 parameter is fully documented with a clear origin ('Project ID returned by list_creator_flow_projects'). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Inspect') plus a concrete inventory of what is returned (chapters, scenes, shots, visual readiness, linked media, scoped assets) and the versioned-snapshot behavior. Clearly distinct from list_creator_flow_projects (enumeration) and get_world/get_world_asset.

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?

Provides an explicit alternative and the condition that selects it ('Use export_creator_flow_project when the user wants a visual overview or file'). Does not spell out when NOT to use this tool or cover update/delete siblings, but the key routing decision is covered.

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