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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The word 'published' adds genuine behavioral context — unpublished/draft programs are not returned — but nothing is said about behavior when the slug does not exist or is unpublished (error vs empty).

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource, with zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 single-entity read with full annotation coverage and a fully documented parameter, the description is close to sufficient. It could note what distinguishes this from search_listings and what a missing/unpublished slug yields, but no critical information is absent.

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% with a single required slug parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'by its slug' restates the schema and adds no format, pattern, or casing guidance beyond what the schema already specifies.

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'), a specific resource ('one published eating disorder program'), and the lookup key ('by its slug'). It implicitly contrasts with the plural sibling search_listings, though it does not name or explain that alternative 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?

The phrase 'by its slug' implies the tool is used when a slug is already known, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no statement of prerequisites, and no routing to search_listings when only a name/query is available.

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