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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context by naming FINRA BrokerCheck as the public API source and stating that no API key is required, but it does not disclose rate limits, error behavior, or data freshness.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: the core purpose appears in the first sentence, followed by concise bulleted use cases and a brief source note. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy.

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 read-only lookup tool with an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what the tool does, what data it returns, when to use it, and the data source. It does not mention limitations or error cases, but the output schema and annotations fill most remaining gaps.

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?

The description clarifies that the CRD number is the key input and that it should come from SearchBrokerCheck, which adds meaning beyond the schema. However, the schema contains detailed descriptions for all parameters, and the tool description does not explain the additional generic parameters like wholesaler_ids or source_resource_id, so the description adds only modest 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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve the full FINRA BrokerCheck profile for one individual using their CRD number.' It also enumerates the returned content (employment history, exam qualifications, licenses, disclosures), making the tool's scope unambiguous and distinct from sibling search 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?

The description provides an explicit 'Use this tool when' section with concrete scenarios and correctly points to SearchBrokerCheck as the source for the CRD. It does not explicitly state when not to use alternatives such as GetIAPDIndividualDetail, but the context is clear enough for an agent to route correctly.

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