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

Annotations indicate non-read-only, non-destructive operation. Description adds critical operational context missing from annotations: cost (5 credits), latency (20-30s), and return structure (before/after text, trade-off notes, PDF URLs). Does not contradict annotations.

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?

Information-dense yet readable. Front-loaded with core action and cost, followed by return values, pipeline positioning, and cross-references. Every sentence conveys distinct operational or navigational information without redundancy.

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?

Compensates effectively for missing output schema by detailing return values (section edits array with before/after text, trade-off notes, optional PDF URLs). Addresses pipeline context, cost, timing, and sibling relationships. Thorough for a complex 8-parameter workflow tool.

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 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. Description adds valuable semantic context by specifying data lineage—parameters should be sourced from prior pipeline steps (ceevee_analyze_positioning, ceevee_get_opportunities)—helping agents understand not just what to pass, but where to obtain values.

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?

Specific verbs (confirm, generate) and resources (narrative lens, CV edits) clearly stated. Explicitly distinguishes itself as 'step 3 (final step) of the positioning pipeline,' differentiating it from sibling tools like ceevee_analyze_positioning and ceevee_explain_change.

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?

Excellent sequential guidance: identifies itself as step 3, specifies prerequisite ('Pass confirmed_lens from ceevee_analyze_positioning'), notes optional enrichment data from prior steps, and explicitly references ceevee_explain_change for understanding specific edits, providing clear alternative pathways.

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