Get one property

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds valuable behavioral context: it returns a specific format, and a 404 indicates the input doesn't match any registered property, with guidance on checking the format. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose and return format, and uses no wasteful words. Every sentence earns its place: one states the result and the other explains the 404 error and recovery action.

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 single-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the return shape and error condition. It also points to list_sites for verifying exact formats, which completes the context. No critical information is missing.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with a highly detailed description of site_url, including exact format expectations and example values. The tool description itself does not add much parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, but the schema is thorough, so a 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 one property's entry with a specific structure ({ siteUrl, permissionLevel }), using the verb 'Returns' and identifying the resource as 'property's entry'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like list_sites by focusing on a single property rather than listing all, and from add_site/delete_site by being a getter.

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?

The description gives context for when to use this tool: when you need a specific property's details and need to verify the exact format. It implicitly advises using list_sites to check registered values when a 404 occurs. However, it does not explicitly state 'use this instead of list_sites when you need a single property' or mention any exclusions.

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