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

Annotations already cover safety (non-destructive, open-world, non-idempotent). The description adds real value by clarifying this produces a collected lead rather than a confirmed booking and explains the data-sharing/consent consequence with Polyares and partners — context not encoded in 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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the key purpose and the 'not a booking' clarification first. Slightly compressed parenthetical phrasing but no wasted sentences.

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 13-parameter collection tool with low schema coverage, the description should characterize the optional service attributes, but it is silent on them. It does adequately explain the collection-vs-booking nature and consent implication, and an output schema exists to cover returns.

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 13 parameters and only 31% schema description coverage, the schema leaves much unexplained, yet the description says nothing about the service fields (bedrooms, bathrooms, frequency, preferred_date, etc.). The only parameter-adjacent content is the consent note, which the schema already documents verbatim in consent_to_contact.

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 resource ('residential house cleaning') and clarifies the operation is lead collection, not booking. It also names the sibling pipeline (request_home_service), giving an agent a way to relate the two tools, though the distinction between them remains implicit.

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 parenthetical '(collecting; not a booking)' signals intent and the 'same pipeline as request_home_service' hints at relatedness, but there is no explicit guidance on when to pick this over request_home_service or list_supported_services.

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