get_brand_guidelines

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a read operation, and the description consistently says 'Read'. It adds useful context about the guidelines being authoritative and overriding discrepancies, which goes beyond the annotation.

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 concise sentences with no fluff. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the additional precedence note is relevant and brief.

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 read-only tool with a single optional parameter, the description covers the essential use context and authority relationship. It does not describe the return shape or individual section values, but those are not critical given the low tool complexity.

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 zero description coverage, and the description does not explain the 'section' parameter or its values. While the enum values are fairly self-explanatory, the tool description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 reads authoritative brand guidelines and should be used before generation. The 'CP-only' acronym is not expanded, but the core purpose is unambiguous in context.

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?

It explicitly says to use the tool before generation and clarifies that the supplied guide overrides visual discrepancies in the one-pager example. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with sibling tools, but the timing guidance is clear.

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