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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds value beyond that by disclosing the return format (GraphQL SDL) and an authorization behavior — results are automatically scoped to the brands the caller is authorized for. It stops short of noting anything about schema size or versioning, so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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 the purpose, then the workflow, then the scoping caveat. No redundant restatement of the title or annotations.

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 zero-parameter, read-only introspection tool with no output schema, the description covers what it returns (SDL types and fields), the follow-up tool, and the authorization scoping. There is no material gap an agent would need filled before calling it.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter meaning to add and the baseline is 4. Nothing in the description misrepresents the no-argument invocation.

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 a specific verb and resource ('Get the schema describing your brand's AI-visibility data') and immediately names what it returns: available types and fields as GraphQL SDL. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling by positioning itself as the inspection step before query_visibility_data.

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?

Gives explicit sequencing — 'Inspect this first, then query with query_visibility_data' — so the agent knows both when to call this tool and which sibling to call next. The alternative is named rather than implied.

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