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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint, so the bar is lower. The description adds 'No authentication required', which is valuable behavioral context not in 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?

Two efficient sentences: first succinctly lists return fields, second provides usage sequence. No extraneous information, front-loaded with key details.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity and presence of output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, usage context, behavioral traits, and parameter guidance without gaps.

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% (both parameters have detailed descriptions), so baseline is 3. The description reinforces the slug's origin and language default, adding minimal extra value. However, it doesn't introduce new parameter constraints, so 4 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'Returns full details of one store template' and lists specific fields (localized title, description, markdown, etc.), making the verb and resource clear. It also distinguishes from siblings by referencing search_store_templates and get_agent_artifact.

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 explicit guidance: 'Use after search_store_templates before recommending or installing; when agentArtifacts is non-empty, fetch bodies via get_agent_artifact.' This clearly states when to use and suggests a follow-up action.

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