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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds limited behavioral context by explaining what each include block returns, but it does not mention auth requirements, rate limits, or default response shape. No contradiction with annotations.

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 front-loaded sentence states the core operation first and then lists the optional include blocks without repetition or fluff. Every clause earns its place.

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 low-complexity read tool with rich annotations, the description covers the main decision an agent must make: whether to request extra blocks. It does not describe the default response structure or error behavior, but those are not critical for a get-by-id call with no output schema.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the enum names by defining stats as per-fight totals, rounds as round-by-round statistics, and scorecards as official judges' cards. The fight_id is also contextualized as a numeric id from an event card in the schema.

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 opens with 'Fetch one bout by id', a specific verb+resource that distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_fighter, get_event_card, and list_events. It also clarifies that the optional include parameter controls data blocks rather than changing the resource being fetched.

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?

It clearly implies the tool is for retrieving a single bout when an id is known, and it explains when to use each include value (stats for totals, rounds for round-by-round, scorecards for judges' cards). It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it.

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