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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true; the description's 'Read-only' simply repeats that. It adds no extra behavioral context such as auth requirements, side effects beyond read-only, or rate limits.

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?

A single compact sentence front-loaded with 'Shop profile' and its fields. The trailing 'Read-only' is redundant given annotations, but the description is otherwise tight.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the field list gives an adequate picture of what is returned and the annotation covers safety. It lacks explicit usage context, but the core invocation needs are met.

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 are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly does not introduce any parameter semantics, and the input schema is empty.

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?

Names a specific resource (shop profile) and enumerates the fields returned, so the agent knows exactly what information this tool surfaces. It does not distinguish itself from siblings like get_status or list_services, but the resource is clear.

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?

No guidance on when to use this instead of get_availability, get_status, or list_services. The only usage signal is 'Read-only,' which is not an alternative-selection rule.

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