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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds little beyond that safety profile. It does clarify that lookup is by slug, which is useful, but does not disclose behaviors like error handling or empty results; output schema likely covers return details.

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 that states the operation, the parameter source, and an example. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with an output schema, the description, annotations, and schema together cover how to call the tool, where the slug comes from, and what the operation returns. Sibling tools are in context, making the definition complete.

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% and includes an example slug, so the schema carries most parameter meaning. The description adds the crucial instruction that the slug comes from the list_faqs catalog, providing source context beyond the schema description.

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?

Description states a specific verb and resource: 'Get one FAQ entry by slug'. The phrase '(from the list_faqs catalog)' ties it to a sibling and makes the retrieval mechanism explicit, clearly differentiating it from the list_* siblings.

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 names list_faqs as the source of the slug, telling the agent that get_faq is for retrieving a single catalogued entry. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternative exclusions, but the sibling reference gives practical context.

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