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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It covers free access, alias resolution, missing-topic handling, demand queues, rate limits, and citation requirements. This is thorough and transparent.

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 dense but every sentence provides useful information. Rate limits are compactly bracketed, and the structure front-loads the core purpose before adding caveats.

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 single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, behavior, limitations, and usage context. It is complete and self-sufficient.

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?

The schema already describes the slug parameter precisely, and the description adds value by explaining alias resolution and how missing topics are handled, which directly clarifies parameter behavior.

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 tool returns the full text of an EnergyAI incentive guide by slug, listing specific content types (intro, sections, FAQs, primary sources). This distinguishes it from sibling list_guides, which presumably only lists guide metadata.

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 provides context for use (answering incentive questions with grounded content) and explains behavior for missing topics and rate limits. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the reference to list_guides in the schema implies the expected workflow.

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