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

The description goes beyond the read-only annotation by explaining the role-based behavior: administrators get complete bilingual records including bodies, tags, citations, and drafts, while other accounts only get a single locale with title, summary, and canonical URL, never the article body. This is rich behavioral context not captured by annotations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core function, and every sentence adds necessary detail. No fluff 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?

For a get-by-ID tool with an output schema, the description is complete. It explains the two access scenarios and what each role receives, including the notable exclusion of article body for non-admins. The output schema can handle field-level details, so no further explanation is needed.

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?

The schema already fully describes both parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by instructing to pass the caller's language in locale and noting that it is ignored for administrator tokens, which is valuable beyond the schema.

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 returns one published article by ID, which is a specific verb+resource. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by detailing the admin vs. non-admin behavior and access to unpublished drafts, making it unambiguous which tool to use for fetching a single article.

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 implies usage for retrieving a specific article by ID, and provides guidance on setting the locale parameter. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_recent_news or search_terminology, lacking clear exclusions or alternative references.

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