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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description's main added fact is that the call is "Free" — useful for deciding whether to call it liberally. It says nothing about auth, rate limits, or error behavior for a missing service_id.

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, front-loaded with the core action, then the workflow guidance, then the cost note. Nothing is redundant and the trailing "Free." fragment carries real decision value.

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 no output schema, the description usefully previews the return payload (params, returns, cache TTL, price) so the agent knows what it gets back. Combined with the read-only annotation and fully documented single param, an agent has enough to call it 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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, including a concrete example ("au-property-crime"), so the schema carries the burden. The description only restates "for a specific service" and adds no id format or lookup guidance.

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 (get the full catalog entry for a specific service) and enumerates what the entry contains: params, returns, cache TTL, price. That enumeration distinguishes it from the broad get_catalog/list_services siblings, though no sibling is named 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?

"Use after discovery to see exact request/response shapes before calling" gives a clear workflow position between discovery (search_services) and execution (call_service). It does not name the alternatives explicitly or state exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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