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 nothing beyond that — no note on not-found behavior, error handling, or what the prospect record contains. With annotations doing all the work, the description contributes almost no additional behavioral context.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Nothing is wasted and the action and resource are immediately clear.

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-record getter, the schema and readOnly annotation cover most needs. However, there is no output schema, so the agent has no information about the shape of the returned prospect record — a modest but real gap the description does not fill.

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 100%; the id parameter documents its numeric pattern and 64-bit precision rationale. The description says 'by ID' but adds no syntax, format, or sourcing guidance beyond the schema, 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 ('Get') and resource ('one Propertyware prospect') by ID. The resource name distinguishes it from sibling getters like propertyware_get_contact and propertyware_get_lease, though it doesn't explicitly route against propertyware_list_prospects.

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: fetch a single prospect when you already have an ID. There is no explicit statement of when to use this versus propertyware_list_prospects for discovery, and no prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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