explain-concept

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral context. It clearly frames the operation as read-only via 'Get', and the exact-ID statement makes the look-up behavior and its constraint transparent. It stops short of describing error handling or return formatting, so a perfect score is not warranted.

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, front-loaded with the action, with examples and a routing hint. Every clause contributes value and there is no redundant elaboration.

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 documentation-lookup tool, this is complete: it defines the input, the exactness requirement, the alternative for finding IDs, and the output type ('full documentation'). No additional information is needed for correct invocation.

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%, so the parameter is already fully documented in the schema, including examples. The description adds the important exact-ID qualifier and references search-concepts, but it does not need to compensate for missing schema detail.

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?

Description opens with a specific verb and resource ('Get full documentation for a VTEX concept'), names the exact-ID mechanism, and provides concrete examples. This clearly distinguishes it from search-concepts, which finds IDs rather than explaining them.

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 explicitly tells the agent to use search-concepts first when the exact ID is not known, which is a clear when-to-use and alternative routing instruction. This removes ambiguity about the tool's role relative to its sibling.

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