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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals this is a safe read operation. The description adds only the REST GET endpoint, which repeats the read-only nature. It does not disclose error handling, return format, or authentication requirements, providing minimal behavioral context beyond the annotation.

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 no filler. The first sentence states the action, the second provides the REST endpoint. Every word contributes to the description.

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 single-parameter read-only operation with strong annotations and schema coverage, the description is sufficient. It clearly identifies what the tool does. The absence of an output schema is not a gap because the return value is implied by 'Get client' and the sibling list is present for context.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with client_id described as 'The client id (required).' The description's 'by id' merely restates the schema information and adds no new meaning or parameter semantics.

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?

Clearly states 'Retrieve a single client by id' with a specific verb and resource. The REST path 'GET /clients/{id}' reinforces the exact scope, and it is distinct from sibling tools like list_clients which retrieve multiple clients.

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 phrase 'single client by id' implies this tool is for fetching one specific client, contrasting with list_clients, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus alternatives. No exclusionary or conditional language is provided.

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