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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful detail that it mirrors GET /api/v1/streams/{stream}, giving an integrating agent a concrete REST analogue, but says nothing about auth, rate limits, or error behavior (e.g. unknown UUID).

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?

One front-loaded functional sentence plus a short endpoint-mapping note. Every clause earns its place and nothing is padded.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned sections (settings, status, tags, destinations), which is genuinely helpful. A read-only single-fetch tool with full schema coverage needs little more, though noting error/not-found behavior would round it out.

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 single 'stream' parameter is documented as a UUID in the schema. The description's 'by UUID' reinforces but does not extend that; with one well-documented param, the schema carries the semantics.

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 and resource ('Get one stream by UUID') and enumerates the payload areas (settings, status, tags, destinations). The phrase 'one stream by UUID' implicitly separates it from list_streams/show_streams, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the single-UUID scope: fetch one stream when you have its ID. There is no explicit when-to-use vs update_stream/get_stream_queue guidance and no stated prerequisites or exclusions.

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