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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and non-open-world, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: the tool only reaches published facts and provenance, and explicitly excludes customer accounts, enquiries, private drafts and payment records — a useful data-boundary disclosure.

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 short sentences, zero filler. The purpose and required id source come first, with the privacy boundary last — appropriately front-loaded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be re-explained, and the description still gives a one-line summary of what comes back (published facts and provenance). Combined with the exclusion list, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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?

The schema documents only type and length bounds with 0% description coverage, so the description must carry meaning: it tells the agent the id is an exact identifier obtained from search_passports rather than a name or partial match. That is a real semantic addition, though it does not explain the 1-160 character constraint's practical implication.

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?

Specific verb (Read) + resource (one public AI MAXX passport) + scope qualifier (public only, single record). It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling search_passports by stating it reads exactly one record by id.

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 states the id must be an exact one returned by search_passports, which routes the agent correctly from the search tool to this fetch tool. It does not spell out failure behavior or when to prefer search_passports instead, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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