Check a public Trust Center record

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context beyond annotations by stating the tool is 'Online' and performs a network read, and it restricts to 'published' records, which gives helpful operational expectations. There is no contradiction.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a useful behavioral note. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 single-parameter read-only tool with strong annotations and full schema coverage, the description is nearly complete. It communicates the resource, the input, and the network behavior. It does not detail the return format, but that is not strictly necessary given the simplicity and the absence of an output schema.

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 schema documentation covers 100% of the parameter meaning, with detailed description for 'slug' including format and example. The main description merely repeats 'by org slug', adding no additional semantic value beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action ('Fetch') and a specific resource ('published Legalithm Trust Center compliance record') with the required input ('by org slug'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like classify or generate_disclosure, which imply different operations.

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 provides context ('Online (reads the public API)') and implies this is for retrieving published records, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned.

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