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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It accurately conveys a read operation and what the response includes (content, direct answer, FAQ), but it does not mention error behavior for nonexistent slugs, whether unpublished articles are accessible, or any access constraints.

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, efficient sentence with all key facts front-loaded: what is retrieved, the scope, and the primary access identifier. No filler or redundant phrasing.

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 fetch tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential return value (full content, direct answer, FAQ) and the required input. It is not overly elaborate, but it is adequate; missing only minor details like not-found behavior or response format.

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 provides no description for the slug parameter, and the tool description only says 'by its slug,' which essentially repeats the parameter name. It does not clarify slug format, examples, or edge cases, so it adds minimal meaning 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 names a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('full content of a single published HVAC insights article'), and a unique access method ('by its slug'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_hvac_decision_content or get_okc_hvac_business_info.

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 clearly indicates this tool is for retrieving a full article when the slug is already known. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the context is unambiguous enough that an agent can infer when to use it over a search tool.

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