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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. Description adds behavioral context: draft IDs are not readable until end-of-day, and valid IDs come from list_journal, which clarifies timing constraints beyond 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?

Brief, front-loaded purpose, followed by essential usage and parameter details. No wasted words; Args block cleanly documents the single parameter.

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 one-parameter read operation with output schema present, the description covers purpose, eligibility of IDs, and parameter format. Complete and self-sufficient.

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 only defines entry_id as a string with no description. The description's Args section explains entry_id is a journal entry id from list_journal, accepts integer or UUID, providing critical meaning at 0% schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get a full generated journal entry by ID from list_journal', specifying verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like list_journal and submit_journal_draft.

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 explains when to use: after end-of-day generation, using list_journal for valid entry IDs, and warns against using draft IDs from submit_journal_draft. This provides clear context and alternatives.

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