Fetch

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context by specifying the output format, the 'public summary' nature, and the connector format, which goes beyond the bare structured fields.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The tool's action and input source are front-loaded, followed by output format and a useful pointer to an alternative. Every sentence earns its place.

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 one required parameter, an output schema, and read-only/idempotent annotations, the description covers what the tool does, where the id comes from, what it returns, and how to get richer data. No critical gap remains for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 schema already explains the id is a facility slug from a prior search result with an example. The description repeats the same guidance without adding new parameter semantics, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Fetch a DC Hub record for an id') and clearly distinguishes it from get_facility, which provides full structured specs. It also names the sibling search tool as the source of the id, so an agent can tell exactly what this tool does.

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 says when to use the tool: for an id returned by the `search` tool, to get a citable public summary. It also explicitly points to the alternative (get_facility or open the url) when full structured specs are needed, making the selection criteria clear.

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