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

The annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds one genuinely new fact — only published listings are retrievable — but says nothing about what happens on a missing or unpublished slug (error vs. empty result) or what fields come back.

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 ten-word sentence that front-loads the verb and the resource, with no filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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 one-parameter read tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the definition covers what is needed to call it correctly, and the 'published' qualifier prevents wasted lookups. The only shortfall is unstated not-found behavior, which matters for an agent deciding whether to fall back to search_listings.

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?

With one parameter and 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents 'slug' fully, including its regex pattern and length bounds. The description only restates that the lookup is by slug and adds no format, normalization, or casing guidance beyond 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 a specific verb (get), a specific cardinality (one), and the lookup key (slug), and the phrase 'published alarm company' clarifies what a 'listing' actually is in this domain. It implicitly contrasts with the plural list_*/search_listings siblings by promising a single record, though it never names them.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this is the slug-based single-record fetch versus the plural search/list tools, and 'published' hints that unpublished records are out of scope. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not or named alternative such as search_listings for when only a name is known.

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