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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to state read-only behavior. It adds context by listing the returned attributes but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like performance implications or required permissions. This is comparable to the calibration example where annotations cover safety.

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 a single sentence, under 15 words, and gets directly to the point. The label 'Agent Sprawl Radar' is slightly stylistic but not wasteful. Every part contributes to conveying the tool's purpose.

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?

The tool is simple (one parameter, no output schema), and the description lists the return fields. However, it omits any explanation of the agent_id parameter and does not clarify terms like 'findings' or 'drift,' which might be ambiguous. It is adequate for a basic get-by-ID tool but leaves gaps.

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 carries the full burden for parameter meaning. It does not mention agent_id at all, only 'return one agent,' which implicitly suggests identifying an agent but provides no guidance on the parameter format or how to obtain it. The param name is self-explanatory, but the description adds no semantic value.

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 clearly states it returns a single agent with specific fields (tools, data access, findings, drift, recommended action). The verb 'return' and resource 'one agent' distinguish it from sibling tools like list_agents and get_drift_report.

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 context is clear: use this tool to retrieve one agent's detailed profile, implied by 'return one agent.' However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives such as list_agents for multiple agents, so it lacks explicit exclusions.

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