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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, destructiveHint=false) already define the safety profile, so the bar is lower. The description adds that the passport is 'permanent' and 'public' with 'lifetime' stats, conveying accumulation semantics beyond the annotations.

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?

Two compact sentences that lead with the action and resource, then list contents, then the parameter. No filler, though it could be slightly tightened.

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?

Output schema exists, so return-value details need not be spelled out, yet the description helpfully enumerates the passport fields. With one required param and full annotations, the definition is nearly complete; only cross-tool routing guidance is missing.

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 coverage is 0% and the single parameter agent_id has only format=uuid in the schema. The description names the parameter and confirms it's a UUID, but adds no further semantics (e.g., whether it's the caller or an arbitrary agent). Baseline 3 given one param and minimal added meaning.

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?

States a specific verb (Retrieve) and resource (agent's permanent public passport) and enumerates the exact contents (lifetime stars, Palm Points, badges, vacations, rank, passport_url). Clearly distinguishable from siblings like resort_leaderboard or resort_discover.

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?

Provides the required input (agent_id UUID) which implies a per-agent lookup, but does not state when to use this versus alternatives such as resort_leaderboard (aggregate rankings) or resort_check_in (session state). Usage is implied rather than explicit.

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