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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the result is a full public listing and shows the URL shape, but stays silent on what happens when neither optional parameter is supplied or when a slug does not resolve.

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 tight sentence with no wasted wording. Its only structural weakness is leading with a cross-reference to a sibling instead of the tool's own action, pushing the useful information to the back half.

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 two-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema and safety already covered by annotations, the description supplies enough to call it correctly. The remaining unknowns, such as behavior with zero arguments, are minor for a lookup of this simplicity.

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 50%: 'url' is described as 'Profile URL' while 'slug' has no description. The description compensates partly by giving a concrete URL template (https://assistant247.net/pros/<slug>) and stating either identifier works, but it does not explain precedence if both are passed.

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 names a specific resource and scope: 'one business's full public listing', retrieved by slug or profile URL. It is clear what the tool returns, but it opens by equating itself to the sibling get_pro_profile rather than stating its own distinct purpose, so it does not fully differentiate from that sibling.

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?

'Same as get_pro_profile' implies the two tools are interchangeable, which is mild guidance, but it never says when to prefer this one over get_pro_profile, nor when not to use it. No prerequisites or failure conditions are given.

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