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

With readOnlyHint=true already declaring the safety profile, the description still adds real value by disclosing the response shape ('full text ... as markdown'), which matters here because no output schema exists. It does not mention truncation limits or auth requirements, but covers the key behavioral trait.

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 short sentences, zero filler. The purpose and output format come first, and the dependency pointer follows — well front-loaded for an agent skimming definitions.

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-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety, the description supplies purpose, output format and the source of valid slugs. Only minor details (error behavior for an invalid slug, content length limits) are absent, which is acceptable at this complexity.

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 schema already gives an example slug, so the baseline is 3. The description adds genuine meaning beyond the schema by telling the agent where valid slug values come from (list_posts), which the schema alone cannot convey.

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 (read/get), a precise resource (one article, singular) and the return format (full text as markdown). It is clearly distinguishable from list_posts, which returns collections of slugs.

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 names the prerequisite step and the alternative tool: 'Get valid slugs from list_posts.' That routes the agent correctly, though it does not state when NOT to use this tool (e.g. for pages, which get_page likely covers).

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