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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, open-world false, and non-destructive, so the description's extra value is its content-selection behavior: localized topics honor locale with en default, while language-independent topics ignore locale. This goes beyond the structured annotations, though it does not discuss error or omission behavior.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying a distinct purpose: core behavior, locale semantics, and sibling routing. There is no repetition of schema or annotation content, and the most important scope statement is front-loaded.

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 output schema covers return values, and the description handles topic selection, locale behavior, and two of three sibling distinctions. It is slightly incomplete in not mentioning get_truss_service as an alternative, and 'topic overview' is mildly ambiguous, but overall an agent can call it correctly.

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 0%, but the description compensates by grouping the topic enum into localized vs language-independent sets and explaining the locale parameter's default and Hebrew option. Both parameters receive meaningful guidance beyond the raw enum values.

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 opens with 'Published Truss information by topic,' naming the resource and the organizing dimension. It also distinguishes the tool from get_truss_overview and list_truss_services by explicitly stating which alternative fits broad understanding and full service catalog, so an agent can tell this topic lookup apart from 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?

It tells the agent exactly when to prefer alternatives: get_truss_overview or the overview topic for broad business understanding, and list_truss_services for the complete service catalog. It also states when locale matters and the default, which is actionable selection guidance.

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