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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the return format is markdown and the result is stable enough to cache for the session, which guides the agent toward a single call rather than repeats.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose and no filler; the parenthetical glosses do real work. The section list makes the first sentence long and list-like, but every item carries meaning, so nothing 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?

A one-parameter reference tool with rich annotations and an output schema needs little more than this. The description covers what is returned, the vocabulary of sections, and the caching expectation, leaving no substantive ambiguity for an agent calling it.

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% and the enum already constrains values, so the baseline would be 3. The description earns more by glossing each value with its purpose — install as first use, results as presenting answers, local as wish list, alerts and holds — which helps the agent pick the right section without trial and error.

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 and resource ('instructions for one step, as markdown') and enumerates the exact section set, so an agent knows precisely what it retrieves. The sibling tools (discover_deals, wrap_link, etc.) perform entirely different actions, so the distinction is unambiguous.

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?

Provides a clear usage pattern — fetch each section once per session, then reuse — which tells the agent how to call it efficiently rather than repeatedly. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use versus when-not guidance, nor does it point to any alternative for related reference information.

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