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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond them: the data source (api.adviserinfo.sec.gov) and that no API key is required, which helps the agent understand availability and provenance.

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?

Front-loads the core action in the first sentence, then uses a compact bulleted when-to-use block and a one-line source note. Every sentence earns its place and the scanning order is optimal.

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 values need not be documented, and the annotations fully cover the read-only/idempotent safety profile. With the key input and its source explained, nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly is missing.

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 registers as 0% and the nested params object carries several fields, but the description names the one operationally significant input (the CRD number) and its origin. The remaining parameters are generic MCP/session plumbing, so the description compensates adequately for the single meaningful argument, though it does not cover the filter/cache fields.

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?

Names a specific verb (Retrieve) plus resource (full SEC IAPD profile for one individual advisor representative) and the exact identifier (CRD number). It also enumerates the returned content (registration history, exam qualifications, employment history, disclosures), making it clearly distinguishable from SearchIAPDIndividual and nearby firm/entity siblings.

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?

Provides an explicit 'Use this tool when' list including the precondition (you already have a CRD from SearchIAPDIndividual) and the use case (deep due diligence on an IAR). It routes the agent to the sibling that produces the required input, though it stops short of stating when not to use it (e.g., for searching).

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