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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one useful behavioral fact — only 'published' providers are returned — but says nothing about what happens when the slug is unknown or unpublished (empty result vs. error).

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 short sentence with zero filler, and the key qualifier ('published') is included up front rather than buried.

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 single-parameter lookup with rich annotations and a fully described schema, this covers what an agent needs to call it correctly, including the published-only constraint. The only gap is not-found/error semantics, which is minor for this tool shape.

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% and the single slug parameter is fully documented with a pattern and length bounds in the schema. The description's 'by its slug' adds no format or sourcing detail beyond that, so 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'), cardinality ('one'), resource ('published funeral provider'), and lookup key ('by its slug'). This clearly differentiates it from search_listings and the list_* siblings, though it does not name them 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 singular 'get one ... by its slug' implies this is for direct retrieval of a known listing rather than discovery, which is the search_listings use case. However, no alternative is named and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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