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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds value by specifying that it returns the 10 most recent notes, which is behavioral context beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, no fluff, and front-loads the core purpose. Every sentence contributes useful information (what it returns and the required parameter).

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter, clear annotations), the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns (details plus 10 recent notes). No output schema exists, but the return value specifics are covered. Sibling tools provide context for when to use this tool vs teams-list.

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% for the single parameter. The description restates the required parameter without adding additional meaning or format details beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 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 that the tool retrieves team details including the 10 most recent notes, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like teams-list by focusing on a single team's details.

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 specifies the required parameter 'id' (integer). While it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, the context of sibling tools and the simple nature of the operation provide implicit guidance. Could be slightly improved by mentioning that this is for getting a specific team, not listing all teams.

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