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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses default detail behavior, the semantic difference between detail values, the error result for unknown slugs (not_found with knownSlugs), and locale default behavior. This gives an agent a clear model of how the tool behaves at runtime.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core operation, then efficiently explains the optional parameters and edge-case behavior. Every sentence contributes meaningful guidance without repetition 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?

With an output schema available, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers default behavior, all parameter options, and the unknown-slug error case, making it complete for a tool of this complexity.

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%, so the description carries the full burden. It explains slug as the service area identifier, detail as summary/overview/full with distinct field outcomes, and locale as en default or he. This is far more semantic than the bare enum names in the schema.

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 that the tool fetches a single published Truss service area by slug, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_truss_services, which presumably returns multiple services.

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 implies usage: call when you have a slug and need one service area, optionally choosing detail level or locale. However, it never explicitly contrasts this tool with get_truss_information or list_truss_services, leaving the when-not-to-use guidance absent.

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