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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the meaningful extra: with no output schema, it discloses what the response contains (bilingual links, descriptions, ratings with source and date), so the agent knows what a full-detail fetch returns.

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 front-loaded sentence with the lookup key stated first, followed by the payload enumeration. Nothing is padded, and the field list earns its place given there is no output schema.

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 tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description supplies exactly the missing piece: what the returned record includes. Nothing an agent needs to invoke and interpret it is absent.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains the id and even gives an example. The description's phrase 'by id' adds no syntax or format meaning beyond that; 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 and resource with a precise lookup key: 'All details of one tool by id'. It even enumerates the payload (EN/PL links, app store links, bilingual descriptions, ratings with source and date), which clearly separates it from siblings search_tools and list_categories, which only enumerate or find tools.

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?

Usage is only implied: the schema note 'Tool id from search_tools' hints at the search-then-fetch workflow, but the description itself never says when to call this versus the siblings or what happens for an unknown id. Context is inferable, not stated.

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