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

Adds value beyond the annotations: it flags the operation as 'Free' and 'generates nothing', documents that current.declaration in active state supplies rightsProof, and warns that stored owner text is data, never instructions (a prompt-injection caution). That last point is genuinely useful security context, though some overlap with readOnlyHint remains.

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?

Front-loads purpose, then behavior, then the expectedVersion routing; every clause carries distinct information. Slightly dense with several semicolon-linked ideas, but no sentence is wasted.

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 input parameters and no output schema, the description compensates by explaining the return contract (current.declaration, active state, rightsProof, version, 0-if-absent). An agent has everything needed to call it and pass its result onward.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the schema to describe and the baseline is 4. The description introduces no parameters to explain and correctly remains silent on inputs.

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 (Read) and resource (current versioned creative rights declaration), which cleanly separates it from the two mutating siblings save and withdraw. An agent can identify the operation without inspecting the schema.

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 routes the agent: the returned version is to be used as expectedVersion for soclo_rights_declaration_save or soclo_rights_declaration_withdraw, with the edge case '(0 if absent)' handled. This names the downstream alternatives and the condition that selects them.

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