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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does real work: it declares 'Read-only' and enumerates the returned record fields (name, url, description, tags, source, first/last seen). It omits what happens when the key does not resolve, which is the one behavioral detail a get-by-key tool would benefit from.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and key semantics, followed by return contents and safety. Every clause earns its place with no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description correctly compensates by listing the returned fields, and with no annotations it supplies the read-only nature itself. For a single-parameter lookup this is nearly complete; only not-found/error behavior is unaddressed.

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% so the baseline is 3, but the description adds genuine meaning beyond the schema's terse 'The entry key/slug' by pinpointing the key as 'the slug used in its SkillTide URL'. That origin detail helps the agent source the value correctly rather than guess at an ID format.

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 and resource ('Get one catalogue entry') plus the exact addressing mechanism ('by its key (the slug used in its SkillTide URL)'). This cleanly separates it from the siblings: list_categories enumerates categories and search_tools queries for entries, while this fetches a single already-identified record.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the required key suggests 'use when you already have the slug,' which in turn implies search_tools is the path when you don't. But the description never says when to prefer this over its siblings or what to do if the key is unknown, so nothing is explicit.

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