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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive profile. Description adds valuable return value disclosure ('array of session objects with id, status, cv_version_id, and created_at') and cost transparency ('Free'). 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?

Three sentences with zero waste: sentence 1 defines purpose/scope, sentence 2 explains return format and sibling relationship, sentence 3 states cost. Front-loaded with critical action verb and resource.

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?

No output schema exists, but description compensates by detailing return structure (field names: id, status, cv_version_id, created_at). Explains the 'all' scope (no filtering). Given zero parameters and clear annotations, coverage is sufficient though pagination details are absent.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters (empty properties object). With 0 parameters, baseline score is 4. Description appropriately does not invent parameter semantics where none exist.

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?

States specific verb 'List' with resource 'positioning sessions' and clarifies scope via parenthetical '(market analysis through lens selection to targeted edits)'. Explicitly distinguishes from sibling 'ceevee_get_positioning_session' by contrasting summary list vs full details.

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?

Provides explicit workflow guidance: 'Use the session id with ceevee_get_positioning_session for full details including analysis results, edits, and PDFs.' Clearly indicates this tool is for discovery/ID retrieval, while sibling handles deep retrieval.

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