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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds only the per-ID lookup constraint; it says nothing about behavior for invalid/unknown IDs or any throttling, which is a modest gap given the lower bar set 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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler that conveys the return content, the keyability, and the provenance constraint all at once.

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 a full input schema, an output schema that documents return values, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description needs only to state what is returned and for which ID — both of which it does.

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?

There is a single parameter and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema description ('Exact listing ID returned by search') already defining format (uuid) and provenance. The description restates the same constraint without adding syntax or format detail beyond the schema, matching the baseline 3 for high 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 ('Return') and resource ('citation text and metadata') scoped to 'one exact listing ID returned by search'. This distinguishes it from the sibling search tool that produces the IDs and from get_vehicle, whose output is vehicle data rather than citations.

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 phrase 'one exact listing ID returned by search' establishes a clear precondition and data flow from the search sibling. It does not name get_vehicle as an alternative or state when not to use this tool, so the routing guidance is contextual rather than explicit.

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