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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating safe read operation. The description adds behavioral context: guides are 'curated' and 'kept current', and the content is 'in scope to share'. This goes beyond annotations by explaining information freshness and sharing permissions.

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 a single sentence that is both comprehensive and concise. It front-loads the purpose ('curated TuLugar guides'), lists topics with brief explanations, and ends with usage guidance. No redundancy or unnecessary 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?

For a simple read-only tool with one enum parameter and no output schema, the description is fully complete. It covers all topics, usage context, and scope limitations. No additional information is needed for correct invocation.

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?

Despite schema_description_coverage being 0%, the description enriches the schema by explaining each enum value (e.g., 'buying-process (step-by-step + documents)'). This adds significant meaning beyond the raw enum list, fully compensating for the lack of schema-level descriptions.

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 it provides curated TuLugar guides on specific topics (buying-process, foreigners, etc.) and explicitly says to use it for 'how does buying/renting work' questions. It distinguishes itself from 38 sibling tools, none of which are guide-related, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 gives explicit usage guidance: 'ALWAYS use this for 'how does buying/renting work' / process / documents questions' and clarifies what is not in scope ('only personalized legal advice is not'). This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use instructions.

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