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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read operation returning plain-text content, but it does not mention error behavior, permissions, or what happens if the slug does not exist. This is acceptable but not deeply transparent.

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?

One clean, front-loaded sentence that contains all essential information. There is no filler, and the key action and resource are stated immediately.

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?

This is a simple single-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema, and the description adequately explains what is returned ('full plain-text content') and how the article is identified ('by slug'). It could mention not-found behavior, but for this simple tool the definition is largely complete.

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 documents the single 'slug' parameter with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds that the slug identifies a single article and that content is returned, but it does not provide additional format details or constraints beyond the schema.

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') with a concrete resource ('single Education Center article') and a clear identifier ('slug'). It also specifies the output format ('full plain-text content'), which clearly distinguishes it from list/search sibling tools.

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 phrase 'by slug' implies this should be used when the agent already knows the article slug, but the description does not explicitly mention when to use this instead of list_education_articles or search_education_articles. No alternatives or exclusions are named.

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