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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description aligns with that. Beyond annotations, it adds meaningful context: the data is identical to get_listing_detail and this fixed id-only form exists for the ChatGPT/OpenAI connector contract. This helps the agent understand why this tool exists and what to expect behaviorally.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the first states the purpose, the second explains the relationship to get_listing_detail and the connector contract, and the third provides explicit usage guidance. 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?

For a single-parameter read-only tool with an output schema present, the description covers purpose, usage boundaries, relationship to a sibling, and the reason for its existence. There are no significant gaps, and the combination of annotations, schema, and descriptions is sufficient for the agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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%—the only parameter 'id' is already described as 'Evlek listing id (UUID) from search.' The description repeats 'by id (from search)' but adds no extra syntax, format, or constraints beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

The description starts with 'Fetch the full detail of one Evlek listing by id'—a specific verb and resource—and enumerates the included fields. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling get_listing_detail by explaining this is a fixed id-only form, so it is immediately clear how it differs.

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?

Explicitly states 'Use when: an id from search is known' and 'Don't use for: discovery — use search first.' It also names the sibling get_listing_detail as providing the same data, effectively guiding the agent toward the correct alternative when applicable.

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