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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that full text is returned (useful, since there is no output schema) but says nothing about failure behavior for invalid or stale ids.

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 well-formed sentence with the action, the return, and the id provenance all front-loaded; nothing is wasted or buried.

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 one-parameter read tool with full annotation coverage and a fully documented schema, this gives an agent everything needed to call it correctly. Only the absence of any error/not-found guidance keeps it from being exhaustive.

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% and the id property already documents 'Result id from search.' The description repeats that provenance but adds no format, length, or validity constraints, 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 verb ('fetch') and enumerates the resource kinds it returns (guide, state page, FAQ answer, glossary entry), which is clearer than the title alone. It is not explicitly differentiated from the `search` sibling, though the id-from-search framing implicitly separates lookup from discovery.

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?

'by the id returned from search' clearly signals this is the follow-up call to the `search` tool, giving the agent a concrete trigger condition. It stops short of staking out when not to use it (e.g., use search instead when you only have a query string), so it is not a full 5.

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