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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured fields. The description usefully adds cost context ('1 point per returned record') and scopes results to 'active' offers, but says nothing about pagination or return shape.

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 with no filler, front-loading the resource and its identifying keys before the cost note. Every clause earns its place.

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 read-only listing tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the resource, scoping, filtering and cost. It stops short of pagination behavior, but nothing critical to correct invocation is missing.

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 all six parameters including enum labels and defaults. The description only restates the category filter and sort at a high level, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

The description names a specific verb+resource (retrieve a seller's active OLX offers) and the input keys that select the seller (user id, uuid, profile URL). This distinguishes it from a generic offers listing, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like run_olx_offers or run_olx_offers_search.

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?

Usage is implied by 'by user id, uuid or profile URL' plus the category/sort options, so an agent can infer this is the user-scoped offers lookup. However, no when-to-use-vs-alternative guidance is given, and the sibling run_olx_offers / run_olx_offers_search are never mentioned as the non-user-scoped equivalents.

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