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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds valuable behavior context about what each view returns, such as 'returns it with its steps' and 'lists who is enrolled and their state.' This goes beyond the schema while remaining consistent with the safety profile.

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 sentences, zero fluff. The first sentence states the primary purpose, and the second explains the view variations. Each sentence earns its place.

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 simple read-only tool with two parameters and good annotations, the description covers the purpose, views, and return highlights. Without an output schema, it provides enough context about what to expect from each view, making it complete.

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 has no parameter descriptions, so the description must compensate. It fully clarifies the 'view' parameter by explaining what each enum value does, and 'id' is implicitly explained as the sequence identifier. This is complete and adds significant meaning 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 reads one drip sequence by ID, using the verb 'Read' and specifying the resource. It also distinguishes the two available views (default summary with steps vs. enrollments), which differentiates it from sibling tools like relm_list_sequences.

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 when to use the tool (when you have a specific sequence ID and want to read it) and explains the behavior of the default vs. enrollments view. It does not explicitly name alternatives like relm_list_sequences, but the context is clear.

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