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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, and the description adds value by explaining the tool expands a search result, the expected id format, and the return shape. This goes beyond the annotations, clarifying behavior without contradicting them.

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, information-dense sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes the output shape. It is concise and well-structured, though splitting into separate sentences for input and output might improve readability slightly.

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?

Given that an output schema exists (as indicated by context signals), the description does not need to detail return values, but it does provide a preview. It covers the input format, purpose, and read-only nature. It does not discuss error cases or prerequisites, but these are not critical for a simple fetch operation.

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 0%, but the description compensates by explaining the `id` parameter must be a 'platform:account_id' from a search result. This provides essential semantic meaning that the schema lacks.

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 ('Expands'), a clear resource (a search result id into account details), and lists the fields returned (account name, id, currency/status). It also specifies the exact input format ('platform:account_id') and output structure, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 the tool is used after a `search` call, but it does not explicitly mention when NOT to use it or compare with sibling tools like list_accounts or get_report. It gives context (read-only, expands search result) but lacks explicit routing guidance.

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