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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds useful context — that it is cheap and returns the credential-scoped business — but discloses nothing more about rate limits, auth failure behavior, or error cases.

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 clauses plus a GraphQL mapping; front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. Every phrase carries information.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields and clarifying the credential-scoped nature of the resource. Nothing an agent needs in order to call a zero-parameter read tool is missing.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly frames the resource as the business the credentials act for, which is the only 'input' semantics that matters here.

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 (Fetch) and resource (the Boulevard business the credentials act for), then enumerates the returned fields (name, timezone, address, phone, website). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like boulevard_list_locations or boulevard_get_client.

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?

"A cheap way to confirm the setup works" gives a concrete when-to-use scenario (credential/setup verification). It does not name alternatives or state exclusions, but the intended context is unambiguous.

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