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 clear. The description adds the 'exact' match behavior, which is useful but minimal. It does not disclose any edge cases, error behavior, or response format, which would add more value.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It conveys the core purpose and parameters efficiently.

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 lookup tool, the description is minimal. With no output schema, it does not hint at what the response contains, and it lacks any mention of error cases, pagination, or how to handle invalid inputs. Given the 0% schema coverage, the description should provide more context to be fully usable by an agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only repeats the parameter names ('state' and 'parcel_id') without explaining their meaning, expected formats (e.g., state code vs full name), or any constraints. For a tool with only two parameters, this is a significant gap.

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 states a specific action ('lookup') and resource ('parcel'), and mentions the two required parameters (state and parcel_id). The word 'exact' hints at a precise, single-record retrieval, which distinguishes it from the broader 'estate_search' sibling, though it does not name the alternative explicitly.

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 implies this tool is for when you have a specific parcel_id and state, as opposed to searching. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this versus estate_search or other siblings, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The guidance is only implied by the word 'exact'.

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