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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context by revealing that the response includes auth keys and attributes, which are sensitive and potentially large fields, going beyond the annotation information.

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 that immediately states the action and outcome, with no unnecessary words or repetition. It is concise, front-loaded, and every phrase adds value.

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?

This is a simple read-only endpoint retrieval with two well-described parameters. The description explains what the response contains (full JSON with targets, auth keys, attributes), and the annotations cover safety, so no output schema is needed. The description is complete for this purpose.

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 fully documents both parameters with descriptions and examples (lineKey as 'v1', endpointId as UUID). The description does not add further parameter semantics, so the baseline 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 'Get' and clear resource 'endpoint', and further clarifies that it returns the full JSON including targets, auth keys, and attributes. It explicitly states 'one endpoint', distinguishing it from list_endpoints and mutation tools like create_endpoint or update_endpoint.

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 clearly indicates this is for retrieving a single endpoint's full JSON, providing clear context for when to use it. It does not explicitly mention alternatives like list_endpoints, but the singular scope and specific fields imply the appropriate use case.

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