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

While annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior, the description adds transparency by specifying what is returned (canonical source URL and bounded document content), which is not covered by 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?

The description is concise, using two sentences to convey the action, the input, and the output. No unnecessary details or redundancy.

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?

The description provides the key contextual details: the source of the ID, the action, and the return type. It could be slightly more explicit about what 'bounded document content' entails (e.g., size limits or format), but it is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 single parameter document_id is well described as an ID returned by search-wayfront-docs, with a warning not to guess IDs. This fully covers the parameter's meaning and source.

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 the action (retrieve) and the resource (Wayfront help-center document), and distinguishes it from the related search tool by specifying that it uses a document_id from search-wayfront-docs.

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 phrase 'using a document_id returned by search-wayfront-docs' implies the correct workflow (search first, then retrieve), providing context on when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the guidance is sufficient.

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