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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that by disclosing the shape of the return payload (paragraphs or markdown, tips, source note). It does not mention article length, truncation, or missing-slug behavior, which keeps it below a 5.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the payload description and ending with the prerequisite. No filler, no repetition of the title or annotations.

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 two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what comes back and where the required slug originates. The lang parameter's fallback behavior is handled in the schema, so the only remaining gap is edge-case behavior (unknown slug, very long articles), which is minor.

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 schema fully documents both slug (with an example) and lang (allowed values and the English fallback). The description adds only the provenance hint for slug, which the schema already states, so the schema does the heavy lifting and the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource: returns the full text of one FreshCheck article, and names what the payload contains (paragraphs or markdown, practical tips, source note). It also names the sibling that supplies the required identifier, so the agent can distinguish it from freshcheck_list_articles without opening a schema.

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 closing sentence explicitly routes the agent: get slugs from freshcheck_list_articles, which establishes the correct call order and the alternative for browsing. There is no explicit 'do not use when' clause, but for a simple single-item read the implied usage is unambiguous.

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