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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It mentions that it takes a slug or id and returns full details, but doesn't disclose what happens if not found, error handling, or any side effects. Since it's a read operation, this is less critical, but the lack of any behavioral context beyond the basic operation is a gap.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly states the tool's function and parameter options. No unnecessary words 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?

Given the simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations) the description is minimally sufficient. It identifies the tool's purpose and parameter usage, but lacks context on the return format or typical use cases. For a simple read tool, this is acceptable but not outstanding.

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%, so the parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds 'full details' but does not specify what those details include beyond what the tool name implies. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema handles the parameter meaning.

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's purpose: getting full details for a single destination by slug or id. It distinguishes from siblings like list_destinations (plural) and other get_* tools, though it doesn't explicitly name the alternative.

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 implies usage for retrieving a single destination, as opposed to list_destinations for multiple, but does not explicitly state when to use this over other retrieval tools. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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