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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds one real behavioral constraint beyond annotations: only published listings are returned, meaning unpublished ones are invisible. It says nothing about behavior for a missing/unpublished slug, so it stays at a 3.

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?

A single short sentence with the key qualifier ('published') and the lookup key ('slug') front-loaded; nothing is redundant. It is arguably too terse for an agent unfamiliar with the toolset, but there is no filler.

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 one-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage, a fully documented schema, and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient: an agent knows it fetches one published doula by slug. It lacks only error/missing-slug behavior, which is a minor gap at this complexity level.

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?

There is a single parameter and schema description coverage is 100%; the schema already defines the slug format, length, and pattern. The description only restates 'by its slug' and adds no syntax or semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (Get) and resource (one published doula), scoped to published listings and keyed by slug. It is clearly distinguishable from list_* and search_listings by being a single-item fetch, though it does not name that sibling explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use guidance or alternatives are stated. The phrase 'by its slug' implies the caller must already have a slug, which is a faint usage signal, but nothing tells the agent when to prefer this over search_listings or what to do if the slug is unknown.

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