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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: citations are only returned when the linked rule clears the two-reviewer gate and has no blocking review, and unresolved keys are surfaced separately.

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 tight sentences with no waste, leading with the return behavior and the gating constraint. Front-loaded and appropriately sized.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value detail is not needed. However, for a lookup tool the description omits where source keys come from and gives no usage framing, leaving a notable gap despite reasonable behavioral disclosure.

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 0% for the single required sourceKeys array, and the description never defines what a 'source key' is, its format, or how to obtain one. It mentions 'unresolved keys' but does not clarify the parameter's semantics.

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 (Returns) and resource (passage-level citations) and qualifies it with the publication-gate condition. Clear enough that an agent knows what it fetches, though it does not name a sibling it differs from (e.g. search_source_passages).

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative tool is named. The gating condition hints at intended use but leaves the agent to infer when to call this versus search_source_passages or search_reviewed_rules.

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