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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by listing exactly what the guide contains and clarifying that duplicate slugs are resolved to the current company.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then packs the return contents into a single dense but efficient sentence. Because there is no output schema, listing the guide's contents is necessary rather than wasteful.

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 one-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it explains the input source, duplicate-slug behavior, and the full set of returned guide information. Nothing material an agent needs in order to call it correctly appears to be missing.

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%, so the slug parameter is already documented in the input schema. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by stating that the slug should come from search_companies and that merged duplicate slugs resolve to the current one.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it returns a cancellation guide for one company, including cancellation method, notice period, traps, billing-partner notes, sources, verification dates, mailing addresses, and URLs. It is clearly distinct from search_companies, which supplies the slug, and from get_cancellation_letter, which would produce a letter rather than a guide.

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 explicitly says the slug comes from search_companies, giving clear context for how to obtain the required input. It also explains that merged duplicate slugs resolve to the current one, but it does not explicitly compare itself with get_cancellation_letter or state when not to use this tool.

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