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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the behavioral profile. The description adds no further details about side effects or constraints, but it does not contradict the annotations either.

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 brief and to the point, but the 'Guidance' segment partially repeats the main sentence and the 'context' field is somewhat cryptic. Still, it remains compact without unnecessary fluff.

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?

The description adequately covers the core retrieval action and parameter origins, but it omits any mention of output format, error behavior, or relationship to similar getter tools. Given the simplicity of a getter, this is acceptable but not fully 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?

The schema descriptions for both parameters are meaningful ('Sound item id returned by cms_list_sounds' and 'Paragraph id returned by cms_list_sound_paragraphs'), providing context that links to list operations. The main description itself adds no extra parameter detail, but the high schema coverage warrants a score above the baseline.

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 clearly states 'Read one paragraph' and 'Retrieve one sound paragraph by paragraph id', which unambiguously identifies the action (retrieve) and the resource (a single sound paragraph).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like cms_list_sound_paragraphs or cms_get_sound. The description only restates its function without clarifying conditions or alternatives.

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