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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that the data is the shop's 'public profile', with no mention of auth needs, rate limits, or failure behavior; the enumerated fields duplicate the output schema rather than adding 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?

Two tight sentences with zero waste; the core purpose is front-loaded and the sibling-routing sentence follows. Every clause earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description is sufficient to call the tool correctly, though it could have stated where to obtain the slug rather than relying on the schema.

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% for the single slug parameter, and the schema already explains the slug format and its origin from a shops-list result. The description adds no parameter guidance, so the baseline 3 is correct.

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 ('Fetch') and resource ('a Fanatics Live shop's public profile') and enumerates the returned facets (social links, follower count, channels, staff). It explicitly names the sibling tools it is not, so an agent can distinguish it without opening schemas.

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?

Routes the agent explicitly: use fanaticslive_shops to browse shops and fanaticslive_shop_shows to list shows, implying this tool is for a single shop's detail. No explicit 'when-not-to-use' or prerequisite (e.g., where the slug comes from is left to the schema), so it falls short of a 5.

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