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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds behavioral context about daily quotas and error responses (isError with instructions) when limits are exceeded, which is valuable for an agent.

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 front-loaded with purpose and contents, followed by quota details and error handling. It is slightly lengthy but well-organized, with each sentence serving a distinct purpose.

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 simple read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers input requirements, output components (listed items), quota limits, and error behavior, providing sufficient context for correct usage.

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% with a single parameter that is well-described in the schema. The description reinforces the parameter's origin (ntfUniqID from search_tenders) but adds no new semantic meaning 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 clearly states the tool retrieves a detailed procurement notice card by internal ID, lists included data (subject, conditions, customer, NMCC, etc.), and distinguishes it from sibling tool search_tenders by specifying the ID source.

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 explains where to obtain the required ID (from search_tenders) and mentions quota limits, which implies usage constraints, but does not explicitly provide when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to sibling tools.

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