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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and no destructive behavior. The description adds value by disclosing that the tool returns a haveny.co article URL which must be included in the response, an important behavioral trait not covered by 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?

Three focused sentences: the first states its purpose, the second gives clear usage context, and the third provides a crucial output instruction. No unnecessary words.

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 one required parameter, no output schema, and safe annotations, the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose, when to use it, and how to handle its output. No gaps remain.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds example topic values that are more detailed than the schema's description, providing concrete guidance on valid 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?

The description clearly states the tool retrieves California HOA board obligations on a specific topic, listing concrete examples like 'fines and discipline', 'elections', etc. This differentiates it from sibling tools such as check_fine_legality or get_homeowner_rights.

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?

The description explicitly says to use when the user is on a board, recently elected, or asking what the board MUST do. It also provides a critical instruction about including the returned URL as a clickable markdown link.

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