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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds contextual value by describing the nature of the output (detailed psychological analysis covering subconscious symbolism, emotional significance, waking-life connections), which goes beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction.

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 somewhat verbose, with a long enumerative list of dream themes. It does front-load the core purpose ('Get the complete dream interpretation') but the extended catalog of examples makes it less crisp than it could be. Not wasteful, but could be more compact.

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 conveys what the response will contain (psychological analysis, specific dream themes). It doesn't explicitly describe the compact parameter's effect on the response, but that is already covered by the schema. Overall, it provides a sufficient picture for a simple read-only tool.

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 input schema fully documents both parameters (id and compact) with descriptions and examples, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the 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?

The description clearly states this tool gets the complete dream interpretation for a specific symbol, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing 'specific symbol' rather than random or letters, so the agent knows it's a by-ID lookup.

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 does not explicitly explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like listing all symbols or getting a random symbol. The phrase 'specific symbol' implies you already have an ID, but there is no direct guidance on alternatives or exclusions.

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