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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, covering the safety profile fully. The description's one addition is that the payload is markdown source, and since an output schema exists even that is largely covered. It adds modest value over structured fields.

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?

Two sentences, no filler: the action and return format come first, then the parameter guidance. Every clause carries information an agent needs.

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?

Single required parameter, full schema description coverage, a rich annotation set, and an output schema, so the description need not explain returns or safety. The remaining job — how to form the path and where it comes from — is done.

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 100% so the baseline would be 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by supplying concrete path examples (`/`, `/glossary/product-led-growth`) and explaining where paths typically originate (search_founder_ventures), which helps an agent construct a valid value.

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 (Fetch), resource (a Founder Ventures page), and output form (markdown source), which is enough for an agent to differentiate it from search_founder_ventures and list_founder_events without opening a schema.

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?

Gives clear context: pass a site-relative path, 'typically one returned by search_founder_ventures', which establishes the search-then-read workflow. It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use guidance or naming an alternative reader, so it is clear context rather than full routing.

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