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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this is a GET endpoint and names the fields returned, but it does not cover error behavior, auth needs, or rate limits.

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 definition is two compact clauses: the core purpose is front-loaded, and the returned fields plus endpoint follow without redundant text. Every part contributes to identifying or calling the tool.

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 simple read-by-ID tool with annotation-covered safety and no output schema, the description gives enough context to select and invoke it. The main remaining gaps are error semantics and how to source the address_id, which are minor for this operation.

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 the single address_id parameter. It does so by saying 'by id' and showing the path variable, but it does not explain the ID type, constraints, or where to obtain a valid address ID.

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: getting one address by ID. The word 'One' distinguishes it from sibling list tools such as funraise_list_household_addresses and funraise_list_supporter_addresses, and the parenthetical enumerates the returned fields.

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 implied by 'by id' and the endpoint path, which tells an agent to call this when an address_id is known. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over list tools or what to do if only a supporter/household is known.

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