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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds meaningful behavior: the inclusion of brand voice profile when set, scoping to the active Space, and the one-call override via space_id. It does not contradict annotations and provides context beyond the structured data.

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 core action and details, with no fluff. Every clause adds value: what is fetched, what is included when set, scoping, and how to override.

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-get read-only tool with no output schema, the description adequately hints at return contents (business plus brand voice profile) and explains the Space scoping. It does not mention error cases (e.g., not found), but the tool's simplicity and readOnlyHint keep this from being a major gap.

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 description reinforces the space_id override meaning already present in the schema, but business_id has no schema description and the description only says 'by id' without format or type guidance. With 50% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but leaves business_id vague.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('Fetch one business by id') and identifies the resource (business) with a clear scope (single vs. list). It also distinguishes from siblings like list_businesses and update_business by emphasizing the read-only retrieval of a single entity and the optional brand voice profile.

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 clearly states the active-Space scoping and directs the user to set_active_space for switching or pass space_id to override. This gives actionable context on when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly name an alternative for fetching all businesses (list_businesses).

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