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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: results are scoped to data visible to the linked Market Brew account, which constrains expectations about completeness.

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 tightly written sentences, front-loading the usage trigger before the filtering mechanics and scope note. No filler, though the closing visibility sentence is somewhat close to restating the account scoping already implied by the title.

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 single-nested-object list tool with no output schema, the description covers when to use it, how to filter, and the visibility boundary. Only the shape/pagination of returned website records is left off, which is a minor gap for a list operation.

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 coverage is 100%, so the query filter fields are already documented. The description goes beyond the schema by explaining the semantic format of crewIds ('comma-separated numeric Crew IDs') and how to obtain the value via get_crew, adding practical meaning to the single nested parameter.

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 ('list current or licensed websites') and ties it to the account's visibility scope, which cleanly separates it from siblings like list_customer_licenses or get_crew. An agent can identify the tool's job from the first sentence alone.

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 an explicit trigger ('when the user asks for current or licensed websites') and a concrete prerequisite route ('use get_crew first when the user supplies a business name or email'). It does not, however, contrast this tool against near neighbors such as list_customer_licenses, so the alternative coverage is partial.

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