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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful payload context by enumerating the returned fields, including the nested menu shape (service_id, price, duration), which no output schema provides. It omits error behavior for an unknown slug, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

A single sentence fragment that front-loads the resource and packs the full return payload into a parenthetical. Zero filler and nothing redundant.

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-only lookup whose annotations cover safety, the description supplies the missing return-value information that would otherwise come from an output schema. Only the failure mode for an invalid slug is unaddressed.

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% with a single slug parameter whose schema already describes it as 'The salon's slug.' The description adds no syntax, format, or lookup semantics (exact match vs fuzzy) beyond the schema, so the 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?

The description names the resource (a salon) and enumerates exactly what it returns — address, phone, weekly hours, and the full service menu with service_id, price, and duration. It is clear and specific, though it lacks an explicit verb and never contrasts itself with the sibling find_salons, leaving the lookup-vs-search distinction to inference from the name.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no statement that this requires a known slug, and no mention of alternatives such as find_salons for discovery. An agent must infer from the name alone that this is the detail lookup to use after obtaining a slug.

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