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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context about the default compact Markdown response and why JSON should be reserved for exact editable fields, though it does not cover error behavior or missing-agent handling.

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 tightly written sentences with the main purpose front-loaded and the format guidance following immediately. No wasted text.

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 read-only getter with two fully documented parameters and no output schema, the description is complete enough: it names the returned information categories and explains the response-format choice.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the format tradeoff but adds little beyond the schema's own format description, and the stated default slightly conflicts with format being a required 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?

States a specific verb and resource: get rich detailed receptionist info, and enumerates the included areas (config, instructions, resources, knowledge, stats). This clearly distinguishes it from listAgents and updateAgent.

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?

Provides clear guidance on when to use format="json" versus the default Markdown, but does not explicitly say when to choose getAgent over siblings like listAgents, getOverview, or updateAgent. Usage is implied by 'rich detailed' rather than stated as a selection rule.

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