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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value annotations cannot: the set of status values the tool reports and the fact that a live link is returned once published — meaningful return-shape disclosure given there is no output schema.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool reports, then when to use it, then when not to. No filler and nothing repeated from the title or annotations.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly takes on the burden of describing return values (statuses plus live link) and the usage context, which is enough for a single-parameter read. It stops short of covering failure behavior for an invalid or missing release_id.

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?

There is one required parameter and schema description coverage is 100% ('The release id.'), so the schema already carries the parameter's meaning. The description adds nothing about id format, where to obtain the id, or behavior when the id is unknown — baseline 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?

States a specific verb ('shows where') and resource ('a press release') and enumerates the concrete states it resolves to: draft, waiting for a person to check it, scheduled, or live. It also names what else comes back (the live link), which lets an agent distinguish this from list_releases or update_release without opening a schema.

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?

Gives an explicit usage condition ('Only when the user asks about a release later') plus two named exclusions (create_release, publish_release, whose answers already include this). Strong routing guidance, though it doesn't address list_releases, the other sibling an agent might reach for when the user wants release data.

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