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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful output context (returns slugs and locale-prefixed URLs), but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or count for what could be a long list. With annotations carrying the safety burden, this is a solid but not rich disclosure.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and output shape followed by the workflow pointer. Every clause earns its place, though the all-caps 'WHAT:'/'USE' fragments read as shorthand rather than polished prose.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the readOnly annotation covers safety. For a simple zero-required-param list tool, the description supplies scope, URL format, and the follow-up path, leaving only minor gaps like list size or ordering.

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 coverage is 100% and the single locale enum is documented exhaustively in the schema (prefix behavior, defaults, what it does not affect). The description adds no parameter meaning at all, so the schema does all the work and 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?

Names a specific resource (Ratgeber) and states exactly what is returned: all slugs plus the /ratgeber/{slug} locale URLs. It is clearly distinct from the single-item sibling get_ratgeber, which it names. It stops just short of a 5 because the 'WHAT:' shorthand is terse and never says in plain terms that this is an enumeration endpoint.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent onward: 'USE get_ratgeber({slug}) then get_ai_page for fulltext,' which tells the agent this tool is for discovery and the siblings are for content. It gives a clear follow-up path but does not state any exclusion (e.g., when not to use it).

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