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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond this: the tool does not render, uses the Talking Shorts pricing curve, and restricts to catalog creators. These are concrete traits an agent would not otherwise know.

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, each carrying distinct information: the action, a non-rendering exclusion, and two scoping constraints. No filler or restatement of schema details.

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?

Given the output schema and 100% parameter schema coverage, the description does not need to explain return values or parameters. The key behavioral caveats — no render, Talking Shorts curve, catalog creators only — are present, making the definition adequate for correct invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter and enum. The description adds only one parameter-relevant constraint — catalog-creator-only actor IDs — which marginally reinforces the actorId schema text but does not compensate or add much beyond it.

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?

Description opens with the specific verb 'Quote' targeting the Ad Studio resource, and immediately distinguishes itself from generation tools by adding 'Does not render.' The qualifiers 'Uses the Talking Shorts generation curve' and 'Catalog creators only' further transparently bound what the tool does.

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 gives clear contextual selection signals: it is a quoting (not rendering) operation for Ad Studio jobs, specific to Talking Shorts catalog creators. It does not explicitly name alternative quote tools like quote_ad or quote_talking_short, but the constraints provide enough guidance to route the call correctly.

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