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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scoping context by clarifying what is not returned (themeSettings values), but does not disclose further behavioral details such as error cases or authorization needs. This adds some value but not rich behavioral context.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is stated first, and the scope exclusion is added immediately after, making it easy for an agent to parse the essential information quickly.

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?

With a single well-documented parameter, an output schema present, and annotations covering the read-only and idempotent behavior, the description is sufficient. It also adds the key exclusion (themeSettings values) that prevents confusion with sibling tools. Nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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%, and the only parameter (blogId) is fully described in the schema as 'Blog ID.' The description does not add any additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already 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 specific verb (Get), resource (custom metadata for a blog), and gives concrete examples (SEO fields, themeId). Explicitly distinguishes itself from theme settings by noting 'Does not include themeSettings values,' which helps an agent separate it from get_theme_settings and get_blog.

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 makes clear it is for blog metadata and excludes themeSettings values, which implicitly routes agents away from get_theme_settings. However, it does not explicitly name an alternative or state a when-not-to-use condition, so some inference is required.

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