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

readOnlyHint=true already declares the operation safe, and 'Get' is consistent with that. The description adds no behavioral details beyond that, such as what happens if the token is not found, whether the token value is returned, or any auth requirements, so it provides only modest value over the annotation.

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 front-loads the core purpose with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple getter, though it does not enrich the definition with any usage or behavior 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 a simple two-parameter read-only getter with fully documented schema properties and readOnlyHint, the description is largely sufficient: it names the resource, scope, and required granularity. It could be more complete by clarifying the return shape or how this differs from listing tokens, but those gaps are minor given the low complexity.

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%, so the schema already documents both user_id and token. The description does not add any meaning, format, or relationship between token and user beyond what the schema provides, 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 clear verb ('Get') and resource ('specific push/device token') scoped to a user. The qualifier 'specific' hints at the singular nature and helps distinguish it from list_user_push_tokens, though no sibling is named.

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 word 'specific' implies this tool is for retrieving one token rather than enumerating all tokens, and the sibling list_user_push_tokens provides an implicit contrast. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives, so the guidance is only implied.

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