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

The annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description does not contradict these and adds no unnecessary side-effect claims. The simple retrieval behavior is accurately represented.

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 a single, clear sentence with no redundancy. It efficiently conveys the action, the resource type, and the key identifying attribute.

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?

Given the simple single-parameter input and no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys what the tool returns (a complete prepared resource profile with evidence-backed facts and provenance). No additional context is needed for an agent to use it correctly.

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 sole parameter 'resourceId' is described as a 'stable resource ID' in the tool description, which aligns with the parameter name and the string pattern in the schema. This provides sufficient meaning for the parameter without needing additional schema-level documentation.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves one complete prepared resource profile by its stable resource ID, distinguishing it from search_resources which likely searches for resources. The verb 'Retrieve' and the specific object 'complete prepared resource profile' make the purpose unambiguous.

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 implicitly provides usage guidance by specifying 'by its stable resource ID', indicating that this tool is appropriate when an ID is known, while search_resources would be used for discovery. This differentiates it from sibling tools without explicit alternatives.

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