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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful operational context beyond the annotations: the 30-requests-per-hour-per-API-key budget and the underlying endpoint (GET /v1/questions/{question_id}.json).

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?

A single dense sentence with the core action and id source front-loaded, followed by rate-limit and endpoint facts. No filler.

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 one-parameter read-only getter with no output schema, the description covers action, id provenance, cost, and endpoint. The only minor gap is that the shape of the returned question object is left entirely unstated.

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% and the single parameter is fully documented in the schema, so baseline is 3. The description adds only the provenance of the id ('ids from classmarker_list_questions'), not format or constraint detail beyond the schema.

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 question-bank question by id') and explicitly points to classmarker_list_questions as the source of ids, which cleanly separates it from the sibling list tool.

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?

Tells the agent when this tool is appropriate by identifying the precondition (you already have an id, obtained from classmarker_list_questions). It gives no explicit when-not guidance, but for a single-resource getter the usage context is unambiguous.

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