Get one listing

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true), so the bar is lower; the description still adds value by disclosing that a 'last-checked date' is returned, which signals data freshness, and that official links are included. It omits error behavior for invalid or unmapped ids, which keeps it from a 5.

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, zero filler, front-loaded with the outcome before the calling instruction. Nothing could be cut without losing information.

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 carries the return-value burden and does so by enumerating the fields returned. For a single-parameter read tool whose annotations already declare the safety profile, nothing an agent needs in order to call it correctly 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema itself gives the URL shape and the 'listing-…' id form, so the description's parameter sentence largely restates structured data. The only added meaning is that ids originate from search_activities, which is marginal; 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Full details for one Grassy Knees listing') and enumerates the payload (schedule, venue, ages, price, registration, official links, last-checked date), which unambiguously separates it from the plural, discovery-oriented sibling search_activities.

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 establishes the call sequence by telling the agent to pass an id 'from search_activities', so the relationship between discovery and detail retrieval is clear. It stops short of explicit exclusions (e.g. what to do when the listing is unknown or the id is stale), so it is clear but not fully rule-bearing.

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