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

The readOnlyHint annotation already declares this is a safe read. The description adds only the REST endpoint mapping, which is mildly useful for tracing but says nothing about error behavior for missing/unauthorized leases or what fields come back. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is adequate but thin.

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 sentences with the operation front-loaded and zero filler. The endpoint sentence is slightly redundant for the agent's decision-making, but it costs almost nothing.

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?

A one-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema is a simple case, but a 'get' tool with no output schema still benefits from a hint about what a lease record contains. The definition is callable as written but leaves the agent with no picture of the response.

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 schema itself explains where lease_id comes from, so the description correctly leaves parameter detail to the schema. It adds no syntax, format, or id-prefix guidance beyond it, so baseline 3 applies.

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 lease by id") and even cites the underlying endpoint, so the single-record fetch is unambiguous. It doesn't explicitly name doorloop_list_leases as the contrasting sibling, but the singular 'one lease by id' framing differentiates it well enough.

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: an agent can infer this is the tool for a known lease_id, and the schema note "from the matching list tool" hints at the list-then-get pattern. There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of what to do without a valid id.

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