Read one author

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description adds value by specifying the required OAuth scope 'authors:read' and confirming the singular read operation. It does not contradict annotations and provides additional auth context.

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 extremely concise, consisting of short phrases that each convey necessary information: purpose, read-only assurance, and required scope. It front-loads the core action and has no filler, making it highly efficient.

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-resource get tool with strong annotations, the description covers the essential details: what it does, its read-only nature, and the auth requirement. It does not describe return values, but the output is obviously an author object, and the lack of an output schema does not create a significant gap.

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 describes 'id' as 'A UUID,' and the description adds little beyond that. Although the tool name and description imply the id refers to the author, the description does not explicitly explain the parameter's role or format beyond the schema, leaving semantics at a baseline level.

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 starts with 'Read one author,' using a specific verb and resource that clearly distinguishes this from list_authors, create_author, update_author, and delete_author. The phrase 'Read only. Nothing is changed' reinforces the read-only nature.

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 implies usage for fetching a single author but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like list_authors, or when not to use it. There is no exclusionary guidance, so it falls short of a clear usage guideline.

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