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

Annotations already declare read-only and closed-world behavior. The description adds meaningful data-availability context: pricing is only present for roughly half of tracks, and few other sources carry it. It does not cover not-found behavior, but the added context exceeds the annotation baseline.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core lookup purpose, followed by a useful emphasis on pricing. No redundant or wasted text.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries return-value burden and does so by listing address, coordinates, hours, amenities, operating status, upcoming events, and pricing. Combined with annotation coverage, an agent has enough to call it correctly.

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%, so the single slug parameter is already fully documented, including its source from search_tracks. The description repeats 'by slug' but adds no format or validation 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: 'Full detail for one track by slug,' and enumerates the fields returned. This clearly distinguishes a single-track lookup from list/search siblings even without naming them.

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 description implies usage via 'by slug' and the schema points to search_tracks, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus find_tracks_near, search_tracks, or the event/schedule tools. The pricing note is a usage hint but not a selection rule.

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