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

The annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, and the description adds useful behavioral context: it returns both an image and text, supports page-to-page navigation fields, and tells the caller to cite viewerUrl. It does not cover permission or rate-limit behavior, but that is less critical for a read-only paging tool with an output schema.

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: the first sentence states what is returned, and the remaining clauses cover usage, navigation, and citation. Every sentence contributes directly to correct invocation.

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?

Given the rich schema, existing output schema, and read-only annotations, the description supplies the missing context an agent needs: when to call it, what content it returns, how to page through results, and how to cite the page. Nothing essential is omitted.

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 100%, so the input schema already documents resourceId, pageNumber, and includeImage thoroughly. The description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond the schema; its mention of nextPageNumber/previousPageNumber appears to refer to output navigation fields rather than input parameters.

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: it returns one page of an FAA document from Aviation Resources, including the page image and full text. It also distinguishes the tool from search_documents by positioning it as the follow-up read step after searching.

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 explicitly says to use this tool after search_documents to read a page in full, inspect figures/charts/tables, or continue reading with nextPageNumber/previousPageNumber. That gives clear when-to-use guidance and names the sibling tool that precedes it.

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