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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety and open-world profile. The description adds useful content context (what the profile contains), but says nothing about auth, rate limits, or lookup failure behavior when a slug doesn't resolve. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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, zero filler. The payload description is front-loaded and the routing sentence follows cleanly, with no redundancy against the schema.

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 needn't be explained, and annotations carry the safety profile. The description is complete enough to invoke correctly, with only minor gaps (mutual exclusivity of slug vs url) left to 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 coverage is 100% – both url and slug are documented with format hints (canonical profile URL, slug example 'aimee-edwards'). The description only restates that either identifier works and adds nothing on precedence or format beyond the schema. 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 ('7NEWS journalist profile'), enumerates the payload (role, biography, portrait, social links, recent stories), and names the sibling tools it is not. An agent can distinguish it from sevennewsau_article and sevennewsau_headlines without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly routes to alternatives: 'Use sevennewsau_article for one story or sevennewsau_headlines for headlines.' This gives clear when-to-use-else guidance, though it doesn't state a positive trigger condition for choosing the author profile itself beyond the implicit 'you want a journalist profile'.

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