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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and no destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about the response contents (Markdown-like body, metadata, licence context, canonical URL), but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as error cases or availability constraints.

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 first states what the tool returns and the second gives the operational sequence. The key identifier concept ('by slug') is front-loaded, and 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?

For a single-parameter, read-only tool with a rich annotation set and an output schema, the description covers the essential invocation context. It tells the agent what to expect in the response and how to obtain the required slug, leaving no critical gaps.

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 already fully documents the slug parameter with an example, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explicitly connecting the slug to the output of list_articles or search_articles, telling the agent where the value should come from rather than treating it as arbitrary input.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('one complete essay'), and clearly distinguishes this from list/search operations by emphasizing a single essay fetched by slug. The phrase 'by slug' and 'one complete' make the tool's role unambiguous relative to siblings such as list_articles and search_articles.

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 states when to use the tool: after list_articles or search_articles has returned the needed slug. It provides clear sequencing context, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool beyond the implied single-record scope.

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