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

Goes well beyond the readOnly/destructive annotations by disclosing that archived Clients are excluded, that Business Accounts normally return empty, that no Client/Site is created and no Scan launched, and the exact cursor discipline (follow every non-null nextCursor even after empty pages). This is rich behavioral context an agent needs.

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?

Dense but front-loaded with purpose, and each sentence carries distinct information (pagination, sibling routing, return fields, exclusions, side-effect safety). Slightly heavy but essentially no wasted text.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description still notes the returned fields, covers exclusion/empty-result behavior, and addresses pagination fully. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly 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 coverage is 50% (cursor undocumented in schema), but the description compensates: it explains cursor usage semantics ('omit for first page; follow every non-null nextCursor') and restates limit's default and 1–100 range. Only the cursor's string format is left unstated.

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 agency Clients) with scope detail (including Clients with no Sites) and explicitly differentiates itself from the sibling list_sites_and_topics preview and get_client. An agent can distinguish it from siblings without opening schemas.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use list_sites_and_topics only for a 20-item preview, use this tool for full inventory, and use get_client to read an archived Client by id. Gives concrete when-to-use and when-to-use-alternative conditions.

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