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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so safety and repeatability are covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact — only *published* listings are returned, so unpublished records will not resolve — but says nothing about not-found/error behavior or response shape.

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 front-loaded sentence with no filler; the qualifier 'published' is placed where it matters and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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-only lookup with full annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but thin: it omits what happens on a miss (unknown or unpublished slug) and gives no hint of the returned shape. Annotations cover the safety profile, so the remaining gap is minor but real.

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% for the single slug parameter, including pattern and length constraints, so the schema already carries the semantics and the baseline is 3. The description only restates that the slug identifies the listing and adds no format or lookup nuance beyond the schema.

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 names a specific verb (Get) and a specific resource (one published driving school), and 'by its slug' plus 'one' distinguishes it from the list-style siblings (list_places, list_sources) and from search_listings. It stops short of explicitly naming which sibling to use instead when a slug is unknown.

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?

Usage is only implied: the phrase 'by its slug' tells the agent a slug is the required entry point, which is the practical precondition for calling it. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no reference to search_listings as the alternative when only a name or query is available.

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