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 useful behavioral details beyond annotations: it returns newest-first, defaults to undismissed, and returns a paginated structure with nextCursor. This enriches the agent's understanding of what to expect without contradicting annotations.

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?

The description is two sentences with zero fluff. The first sentence states the primary action and filters; the second covers defaults and pagination. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and immediately gives the agent the essential call pattern. Every sentence 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?

The tool has no output schema, but the description explicitly states the return shape (paginated items + nextCursor) and how to use it. It covers the key behavioral aspects (default filter, ordering, pagination) and the householdId context is in the schema. For a read-only listing tool with annotations covering safety, this is complete enough for correct invocation.

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% with each parameter already described. The description adds value by clarifying the kind enum values inline (though they are in schema) and explaining the pagination flow (pass nextCursor back as cursor). It reinforces parameter usage without redundancy, and the cursor semantics are clarified beyond the schema's brief description. This is a solid compensation given the high schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('household's AI-generated insights') with a clear ordering constraint ('newest first'). It also enumerates the filter dimensions (kind, periodStart) and pagination, distinguishing it from other list_* siblings that target different entity types. The purpose is unambiguous and actionable.

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 description explains when to use the tool for listing insights, notes the default filter (undismissed), and describes how to paginate via cursor. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or conditions that would select a different sibling, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide. The householdId guidance is also present in the schema, so the description adds moderate usage direction.

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