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

Annotations already cover the read-only and closed-world profile; the description adds value on top by enumerating the possible price values, noting the listing is limited to 'live' offers, and stating no key is needed. It stops short of describing ordering, pagination, or result limits.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, followed by the optional filter and the auth note. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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 one-parameter, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers the returned content, the optional filter, and auth requirements. Only the absence of any result-size or pagination note keeps it from being fully 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?

With a single parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already carries the meaning. The description's 'Pass agent (a slug) for one agent' reinforces the format but adds nothing the schema does not already say.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Lists live offers') plus the fields returned (price tiers, where people buy them), so the agent knows exactly what it gets. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling find_offers, which sounds like an overlapping lookup, leaving the agent to guess between the two.

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?

'Pass agent (a slug) for one agent' explains how to narrow the listing, and 'No key needed' tells the agent no auth step is required. However, there is no guidance on when to use this instead of the similarly named find_offers sibling, so the selection decision is left implicit.

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