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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds only that the response contains schema/description/example — which the output schema already carries — and says nothing about auth, rate limits, or caveats.

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 compact sentence that front-loads what the tool returns. Appropriately sized for a metadata lookup, though its brevity borders on under-specification of the tool's workflow role.

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 metadata tool with full schema coverage, an output schema, and complete annotations, the definition is adequate but leaves the agent to infer how it fits with ireland_call/ireland_catalogue and when to prefer it.

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% and both parameters are documented with examples ('cso', 'cso_get_data') in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax, format, or relationship detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('describe') and resource ('one source operation') and enumerates what is returned (argument JSON schema, description, example). It implicitly distinguishes from ireland_call (which invokes an operation) but never names or contrasts siblings explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no alternatives named. The agent must infer that this is the inspection step preceding ireland_call or ireland_catalogue.

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