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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds real value beyond them by disclosing return content and, importantly, the chaining behavior that returned image ids feed update_image_alt.

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?

One dense sentence with the purpose front-loaded, then the payload and the chaining hint. Zero filler; every clause carries information.

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 annotations covering safety and an output schema covering return shape, the description only needs to frame purpose, input provenance, and workflow links, all of which it does. The absence of an explicit when-not/alternative keeps it just short of a 5.

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% for the single resourceId parameter, including the gid/numeric/handle resolution rule, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description restates the id provenance ('from list_resources / get_page_seo') without adding syntax or constraints beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline 3.

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+resource ('Full SEO detail for one resource by id') and enumerates the payload (SEO title/description, meta score, image alt text), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_page_seo and get_image. An agent can tell what it returns without opening 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?

Names upstream sources for the id (list_resources / get_page_seo) and a downstream consumer (image ids feed update_image_alt), giving clear workflow placement. It stops short of an explicit when-not or an alternative to use instead, so it is strong context rather than full routing.

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