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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable semantics about what `indexed: true` versus `false` means in downstream query/search results, which goes beyond the annotations; it does not cover error/not-found behavior, keeping it from 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?

Front-loaded with the core action and return shape, followed by the lookup workflow and the indexed-flag semantics. Every sentence carries actionable information with no repetition or filler.

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?

Given a single required parameter, 100% schema coverage, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description is complete. It explains both the input discovery path and the meaning of returned property flags, leaving no material gap for correct invocation.

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 single `collection` parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds practical meaning by telling the agent how to obtain a valid collection id via list_collections, exceeding the baseline for complete schema coverage.

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 ('Describe one collection in detail') and immediately specifies what is returned (metadata plus a properties array with type/description/flags). It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming list_collections, query_collection, search_collection, and get_object in service of the workflow.

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?

Explicitly prescribes the sequence: 'Call list_collections first to find a collection id, then describe_collection.' It also states the fallback path for non-indexed properties ('retrieve it through get_object instead'), giving both when-to-use and an alternative.

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