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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, so "Read-only" merely repeats structured data. The only added value is noting the response includes the recycle plan and approval state, which is useful but modest context beyond the annotations.

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 tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and no filler. Efficiency is good, though "Read-only" is redundant with the annotations.

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 read tool with no output schema, mentioning the returned fields (recycle plan, approval state) helps, but the description omits the return shape and any parameter guidance despite incomplete schema coverage.

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?

With only 50% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but adds nothing about parameters. The required `id` and `brand_id` are undocumented in both the schema and the description, leaving the agent to infer their meaning.

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 ("Read one scheduled post") and even names the payload contents (recycle plan, approval state). It doesn't explicitly differentiate from close siblings like aidelly_list_scheduled_posts or aidelly_get_post, but the singular resource makes the intent clear.

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 only implied: the agent infers you call this when you need a single scheduled post by ID. There is no explicit when-to-use vs aidelly_list_scheduled_posts / aidelly_get_post, and no stated prerequisites or exclusions.

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