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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses that it returns details but does not mention any behavioral traits such as read-only nature, required permissions, rate limits, or error handling. The description is minimal.

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?

The description is a single concise sentence in Japanese, no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and result. However, it could be slightly more structured for clarity.

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 get-tool operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description lists the returned fields (description, conditions, license, URL). It is fairly complete, though it omits error behavior. Contextual completeness is good given the tool's 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 100% for the single parameter 'id', which is described as 'tool id (included in search_ai_tools results)'. The tool description adds context about returning fields but does not add meaning beyond the schema for the parameter itself. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool returns details of one tool, listing specific fields (description, conditions, license, URL). It is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes from sibling search_ai_tools (which returns a list) and verification_summary.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not explicitly say 'use this after search_ai_tools to get full details' or exclude inappropriate contexts. The description is only about what it does, not when to use it.

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