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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'Get' conveys a read-only operation and 'approved public' signals access restrictions, but it does not mention error behavior, response format, auth requirements, or what happens when a slug is not found.

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 sentence with every word earning its place. The core action, resource type, visibility constraint, and lookup key are all front-loaded without redundancy.

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-parameter read operation the description is minimally viable, but without annotations or an output schema it leaves response shape and error conditions unspecified. Agents can invoke it correctly but may not know what to expect back.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. The phrase 'by slug' directly explains the role of the only parameter, which is meaningful given the schema only provides type and pattern.

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 and resource ('Get one approved public resource by slug'), clearly identifying a singular lookup operation. This distinguishes it from siblings like search_resources or list_taxonomies.

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 clearly implies the tool is for fetching a single resource when the exact slug is known, and the words 'approved public' set access context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, so it falls short of a 5.

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