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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive). The description adds a genuinely new behavioral fact the annotations can't express: 'Flat 5 points per successful run,' which lets an agent weigh cost before invoking.

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?

Two tight sentences, zero waste, with the resource and returned fields front-loaded and the cost note trailing. Nothing to trim.

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-parameter, fully documented lookup with full annotation coverage, the description supplies purpose, returned content, and cost. It only lacks a pointer to the search sibling for discovering ids.

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% and documents the single 'product' parameter as an id or URL with an example. The description's 'by id or URL' merely restates the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 full Capterra product details') and enumerates the returned content (vendor, pricing, ratings, features). The id-or-URL input frames it as a detail lookup, implicitly distinct from the search/reviews siblings, though it never names them.

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?

Implies an id or URL is required, which hints you must obtain one elsewhere, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance and never routes the agent to run_capterra_products_search or run_capterra_category_products to find an id.

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