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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns the full text of a 'published' report, implying a constraint that the report must be published. However, it does not mention permissions, error handling, or response format beyond 'full text', which is modest but adequate for a simple read operation.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word earns its place; no filler or redundancy.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value ('full text') and the required input. It does not explain edge cases (e.g., missing report), but given the low complexity, it is sufficiently complete. The sibling tool context helps but is not explicitly referenced.

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%, and the parameter 'period' is well-documented with an example. The tool description also repeats the example ('2026-Q2'), adding no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the action ('Get'), the specific resource ('full text of a published ETC Accountability Report'), and the key parameter ('by period'). It distinctly differentiates from the sibling tool 'list_accountability_reports', which likely only returns metadata or summaries.

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 the user needs a specific period key to retrieve the full report, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool instead of 'list_accountability_reports' (e.g., to get full content after listing available periods). No exclusions or alternative guidance provided.

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