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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint) already declare safety profile. Description adds context that data is 'public' and what content is included (location, facts, images, ski maps), which helps the agent anticipate behavior. No contradictions.

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, front-loaded with action and resource, then usage guidance. No wasted words.

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?

Simple tool with one parameter. Annotations cover safety and idempotency. Description explains content scope and use cases. Absence of output schema is acceptable because the description enumerates return content (information, location, facts, images, ski maps).

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% with skiResortId described as 'Ski resort id from list_ski_resorts.' Description does not add further parameter detail; baseline 3 applies because the schema fully documents the parameter.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Return' and resource 'public ski resort information, location, facts, images and ski maps', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like get_ski_area_detail which targets ski areas. It states exactly what the tool provides.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this for explaining and comparing destinations, not for apartment prices or availability; use search_apartments for live week-specific accommodation results.' This provides when-to-use, when-not-to-use, and names a specific alternative.

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