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

Annotations already establish this as a read-only operation (readOnlyHint=true). The description adds that it returns 'full markdown content and metadata,' which clarifies the output shape without contradicting the annotation. It doesn't detail metadata fields, but that is beyond what annotations cover.

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, direct sentence that immediately states the action and object. No filler or redundant context.

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 this simple get-by-slug tool, the description covers what it does, which resource it targets, and what kind of output to expect (markdown and metadata). With full parameter documentation in the schema and a readOnly annotation, nothing critical is missing.

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?

The schema already fully describes the singular 'slug' parameter with an example (100% coverage). The description merely restates 'by slug' and offers no additional semantic detail, so it does not elevate beyond the schema baseline.

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 uses the specific verb 'fetch' and clearly identifies the resource ('a single guide') and the retrieval key ('by slug'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like dp_search_guides (search-based) and dp_get_glossary_term (different entity type).

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 implicitly directs use to when a guide slug is already known, but it does not explicitly instruct the agent to use dp_search_guides when the slug is unknown, nor does it mention any alternative or exclusions. Thus it falls between minimal and clear context.

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