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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It does disclose that the return includes full metadata and image_url, which is useful. However, it does not clarify behavior like not-found handling, authentication requirements, or response format.

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, front-loads the action and resource, and contains no filler or redundant information.

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-by-slug tool with one parameter, the description provides the essential purpose and return value. It could be improved by mentioning what happens when no screen matches, but the low complexity makes the description sufficient.

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 schema only defines 'slug' as a string with no additional description. The tool description explains that the slug is used to identify a single screen, adding meaningful context beyond 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a precise resource ('full metadata + image_url for a single screen by slug'). It clearly identifies the input (slug) and distinguishes this tool from siblings like search_screens or get_screen_sections.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving a single screen when its slug is known. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use it instead of alternatives, such as search_screens for discovery or get_screen_sections for screen sections.

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