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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond that—no auth requirements, rate limits, or error behavior. It neither contradicts nor enriches the structured safety profile.

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 no wasted words. It states the resource and lookup keys immediately and stops.

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 item-lookup tool with 100% schema coverage, an output schema, and read-only annotations, the description is complete enough to call correctly. The main omission is routing context relative to the search/facets siblings, but that is not strictly required.

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%, with examples and a pointer to facets(facet=outlet) already documented in the schema. The description only restates the parameter names, adding no format details beyond what the schema provides, 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 resource (Journalists dataset record) and the keys that identify it (outlet id and slug), so the agent knows this is a direct item lookup. It does not name siblings like datasets_journalists_search or facets, so sibling differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The required parameters imply you need a known outlet+slug, but the description never says to use this instead of the search or facets siblings, nor what to do when you lack an outlet id.

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