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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by enumerating the returned content, which matters since there is no output schema, but says nothing about error behavior for missing IDs or size/latency characteristics. Useful but modest 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?

Two sentences, zero filler: the first front-loads what is returned, the second gives the prerequisite. Every clause earns its place.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage, the description supplies what the agent most needs: the returned fields and how to obtain valid IDs. The lack of output schema is partly compensated by the enumerated return contents; only failure-mode guidance is absent.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single parameter already states it is the unique story identifier obtained from list_stories. The description's 'by ID' phrasing merely restates the schema, adding no format, validation, or edge-case meaning. 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?

States a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('story') scoped by ID, and even enumerates the payload (details, summary, metadata, source URL). This clearly separates it from the sibling list_stories, which returns collections rather than a single full record.

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?

Gives explicit prerequisite guidance: 'Use list_stories first to obtain valid story IDs,' which routes the agent to the right sibling for discovery. It does not state when-not to use it or what happens with an invalid/stale ID, so it falls short of full when/when-not coverage.

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