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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the read-only safety profile is covered. The description adds that the result is 'structured details' and that it addresses exactly one venue or vendor, which is mildly useful, but it does not disclose behaviors like not-found handling or error conditions.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It states the operation, the target resource, and the parameter source efficiently.

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 simple two-parameter read-only fetch tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential input-origin guidance and clarifies the scope of the result. It stops short of describing the exact output shape or failure behavior, which would make it fully complete.

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. It does by explaining that both category and slug are values returned by search_nc_wedding_directory, which gives agents the source and relationship of the parameters. However, it does not explain the meaning of slug beyond that or define category's role more deeply.

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 ('Get') with a clear resource ('structured details for one venue or vendor') and ties the operation to identifiers from the sibling search tool. This clearly distinguishes it from search_nc_wedding_directory, which returns the directory listing rather than individual details.

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 explicitly states that category and slug should come from search_nc_wedding_directory, providing clear contextual guidance on when to use this tool. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or saying when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous.

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