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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description adds value beyond that with 'Keyless' (no API key or auth setup needed) and 'Returns the statutory text and its amendment history' (return content). These are genuine behavioral disclosures not carried in the annotations. Nothing about rate limits or error behavior is mentioned, but the read-only annotations lower the bar; the description clears it.

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, each earning its place: core purpose, worked citation mapping, and usage examples. The most important information (full text, Texas statutes, by citation) is front-loaded, and the query templates at the end are practical rather than filler. No redundancy with the schema or annotations.

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 two-parameter read-only lookup with full annotations, 100% schema coverage, and schema examples, the description covers the essential ground: what it returns (statutory text + amendment history), access model (keyless), and the code/section mapping. It also points to tx_codes for the complete code list. The only gap is edge-case behavior such as invalid citations or unavailable sections, which is a minor omission for a tool this simple.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3: the schema already fully documents 'code' (with examples 'PE', 'FA', 'CP', 'TX' and a pointer to tx_codes) and 'section' (with formatting guidance). The description adds a natural-language-to-parameter mapping example ('Texas Penal Code 19.02' is code 'PE', section '19.02'), which helps an agent parse user queries into parameters, but this is marginal value on top of an already-complete schema. A 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource construction: 'Get the FULL TEXT of a section of the Texas Statutes — Texas state law — by citation.' It then reinforces scope with a worked example mapping 'Texas Penal Code 19.02' to code 'PE', section '19.02', and explicitly notes the tool is about full text, which distinguishes it from the sibling tx_codes that lists available codes. An agent can tell exactly what this tool does and what it is not.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance with three concrete query templates ('what does Texas Penal Code 19.02 say', 'text of Tex. Fam. Code 6.001', 'check a Texas statute a case relies on'). The schema adds an implicit alternative, 'Call tx_codes to see them,' which routes agents to the right sibling for code discovery. However, the description itself never names an alternative or states a when-not-to-use condition, so it stops just short of a 5.

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