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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about id provenance and format, but does not disclose error behavior or return structure beyond 'full text'.

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 sentence with no filler; it front-loads the purpose and id format. Every element earns its place.

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 read-only tool with one parameter and rich annotations, this description is sufficient: an agent knows what to pass and what it will receive. No output schema exists, but the return value is stated directly.

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 schema only says id is a non-empty string, so the description carries the burden for parameter meaning. It explains that the id is a search result identifier in 'slug#anchor' format, which is meaningful guidance not present in the schema.

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 states that the tool returns the full text of a `search` result for a given id, and specifies the id format as 'slug#anchor'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling search tools, which would return result lists rather than full content.

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 phrase 'Egy `search`-találat teljes szövege' makes the intended workflow clear: call this after obtaining a search result id. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the usage context is strongly implied.

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