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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the founder-JWT auth requirement, which is genuinely useful context. It does not disclose return shape, pagination, or whether the master switch is included in the lane list (though that's arguably covered by 'master switch').

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 sentences, front-loaded with the auth requirement, which is good structure. But the second sentence is a comma-spliced fragment ('with its on/off and the master switch') that reads more like a field dump than clear prose. It earns its space but isn't polished.

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 founder tool with no output schema, the description should describe the returned shape more precisely. It names example lanes (X DMs, Telegram, buy bot, outbox) which is helpful, but omits whether the master switch is global or per-lane, and no output format is specified. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly doesn't pretend any parameters exist; no parameter semantics are needed.

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 it returns platform lanes with on/off and master switch, and 'get' verb is implied by name. However, the phrasing 'Every platform lane ... with its on/off' is awkward and the resource (platform switches) is named in the title rather than described. It's decipherable but not crisp.

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?

The 'Requires the founder's JWT' clause implies a privileged read with an auth precondition, which is useful. But there is no explicit when-to-use vs. siblings like interface_set or agent_mode_set, nor any statement of when not to call it. Usage is only implied.

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