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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Public details' signals a read-only, low-risk operation with no side effects, which is useful. However, it does not disclose response format, not-found behavior, or any error conditions that an agent might encounter.

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 one concise, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to identifying the tool's purpose and scope.

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 one-parameter retrieval tool, the description is largely complete: it names the target resource, the operation, and the id requirement. The lack of an output schema and any error-behavior context leaves a minor gap, but the low complexity means this is not a serious deficiency.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the single parameter 'id' is already well documented as 'The agent id from list_agents'. The main description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), a clear resource ('marketplace agent'), and a precise scope ('by its id'). It also explicitly says 'public details', which distinguishes it from listing or searching siblings and from get_solution.

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 implies usage: after obtaining an id from list_agents, call this tool to retrieve that single agent's public details. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over siblings like search_agents or list_agents, nor does it name alternatives.

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