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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It helpfully enumerates the returned fields (ownership, builtBy, canonical URL, links, proof count), but says nothing about what happens with an unknown slug, auth requirements, or whether the 'indexed' snapshot can be stale.

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 with no filler; the identifier and the return contents are both stated immediately.

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-param lookup with no output schema, the description does the necessary work by listing the fields returned. Only minor gaps remain around error behavior and slug format.

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?

One required param at 0% schema coverage, so the description must compensate. 'By slug' establishes that the param is the project's slug identifier, but adds no format or normalization guidance (URL form, casing) beyond that single inference.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('get ... one project by slug') and enumerates the payload, which implicitly separates it from list_projects and get_proof. It never names a sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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 phrase 'by slug' implies the usage context: fetch a single project when you already have its slug. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no pointer to list_projects for browsing or search_faq for other lookups.

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