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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so safety is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: the page is public, it is a shop page rather than guide content, the guide is sold on the page, and the returned data includes price and photo URLs. No contradiction with 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?

The description is two short sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, the return contents are listed compactly, and the 'sold on its page' sentence adds useful context without bloating the description.

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 low-complexity one-parameter getter, the description is complete: it explains what the tool returns, that the page is public, what the guide is, and that it is sold at that page. The output schema and readOnly annotations supply the remaining return-format and safety information, so nothing essential is missing.

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 only one parameter, slug, and the schema already provides a full description including its role as the last part of the guide's URL, a pattern, and max length. The tool description does not need to repeat this, so the baseline of 3 applies since the schema carries the semantic burden.

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 names a specific verb and resource: retrieving one city guide's public shop page, and enumerates the exact contents returned (standfirst, contents, price, photo URLs). The word 'One' clearly differentiates this single-item getter from list_guides and aligns with sibling get_* tools without ambiguity.

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 makes the usage context clear: use this when you need a single city guide's public shop page, identified by slug. It does not explicitly name list_guides or other alternatives, but the singular and public-shop-page framing gives enough context for correct selection among siblings.

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