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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds useful behavior beyond that: it is data-only, never renders a search card, and expects the agent to provide prose with source links, which clarifies output handling.

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?

The description is three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by usage and behavior. Every sentence adds distinct information with no wasted wording.

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 an output schema and safety annotations present, the description need not cover return values or read-only behavior in depth. However, it omits how to obtain the required exact type and id and does not route the agent to search tools first, leaving a meaningful gap for a lookup-only tool among many search siblings.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter semantics. It only says 'exact type and id' and does not explain the type enum values, what each type represents, or where a valid id comes from, leaving both parameters largely undocumented.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Data-only detail lookup by exact type and id.' It also distinguishes itself from search siblings by noting it 'never renders another search card,' letting an agent tell it apart without opening other schemas.

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 gives a usage context ('Use for Ask AI follow-ups') but does not specify when not to use it or which alternative to use instead. The guidance is implied rather than explicit, leaving the agent to infer the relationship to search tools.

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