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

Goes well beyond the readOnlyHint=false/destructiveHint=false annotations by disclosing the Hunter->PDL->RocketReach waterfall, the exact billing rule (charged only on a verified hit, miss free, already-revealed/CRM contact free), and the user-confirmation requirement. This is exactly the cost/auth behavior an agent needs 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?

Purpose is front-loaded, then billing, then the multi-call pattern. Dense and information-rich, though the parenthetical-heavy sentences are slightly packed; nearly 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 credit-charging enrichment tool with no output schema, the description covers sourcing, inputs, cost model, misses, caching, and the confirmation requirement. Nothing essential 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?

With 67% schema coverage, the schema documents company, full_name, and linkedin_url, but the description adds practical guidance on which fields to pass and for what ('full_name + company, linkedin_url if shown'). It doesn't explain first_name/last_name/company_domain, so not a full 5.

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 ('Reveal the verified work email') and resource ('ONE profile from a search_contacts result'), and explicitly distinguishes itself from the search_contacts sibling that produces its input. An agent immediately knows what this does and where its input comes from.

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?

Gives explicit how-to-use guidance ('Pass the profile's full_name + company (and linkedin_url if shown)'), the looping pattern for multiple contacts, and a confirmation prerequisite when revealing many due to credit cost. When-to-use and when-to-confirm are both stated.

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