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

Annotations already establish that this is a safe read-only, non-open-world call. The description adds useful behavioral context: the outline excludes document text and the call is recorded, which is relevant audit information not captured by the 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 short and front-loaded: it states what is returned, how it relates to clause lookup, and the logging behavior. Every sentence carries useful information without repetition.

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 annotations covering safety, schema coverage at 100%, and an output schema present, the description provides enough context for correct invocation. It explains the outline's purpose and points to get_clause for full text.

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 100%, so slug and as_of are already well documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level semantics beyond the general 'one document' framing, which is acceptable given the schema 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: reading one document's top-level structure without its text. It also distinguishes the tool from get_clause, which is for reading the actual words, so an agent can tell the two apart immediately.

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?

It gives a clear usage condition: use the outline when you know roughly where to look for a clause key, and use get_clause to read the words. It does not explicitly cover when to prefer list_documents or search_policies, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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