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

The description adds useful context beyond the annotations: output format (Markdown), a not-legal-advice disclaimer, and template sourcing details (32 public vs 176 full). It aligns with idempotentHint=true by implying deterministic template parametrization, and no contradiction with readOnlyHint=false.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then corpus context and a usage hint. No extraneous words; each sentence adds distinct value.

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?

Despite a nested parameter and no output schema, the description nails the essential behavior: input source, required discovery step, output format, and disclaimer. It could mention error behavior for invalid slugs, but overall it's well-rounded for an agent.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description enriches company_context semantics by mentioning 'Variables substituted into {{COMPANY_NAME}}, {{SECTOR}}, etc.', which clarifies how the parameter is used. It also reinforces the template_slug discovery via search_controls.

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 verb 'Parametrize' with a specific resource ('NORMA compliance template') and output ('Markdown'). It distinguishes from siblings by explicitly directing users to search_controls for slug discovery, setting this tool apart as the generation step.

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 a clear prerequisite: use search_controls first to find a slug, which tells the agent when to call this tool (after discovery). It also frames the tool's role in a workflow but doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives like assess_gap or map_controls; however, the search_controls mention gives practical guidance.

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