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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately describes the primary behavior as a read operation returning a single offer's details and lists the data categories, but it does not cover error behavior, invalid ID handling, or any permissions. This is minimally adequate for a simple retrieval tool.

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 action and the return content without filler. The enumeration of returned fields is useful and compact, making the description highly efficient for an agent.

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 tool with low complexity (one required parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is largely complete: it explains what the tool returns and the schema fully documents the input. The main gap is the lack of usage/alternative routing, but that is already accounted for under usage guidelines.

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%: the only parameter 'id' is already described as an offer number with an example ('groo1516'). The description adds no further parameter semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Vrátí' - returns) and a specific resource ('podrobnosti jedné nabídky' - details of one offer), and enumerates the expected content: description, parameters, address, photos, and agent contact. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like detail_projektu, which target a different resource.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as detail_projektu or hledej_nemovitosti. The use case is implied by the tool name and the phrase 'jedné nabídky', but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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