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

The description discloses the permanent nature of the suppression and its cross-tool effect on get_house_review, which goes beyond the annotations. The annotations (not read-only, not destructive) are not contradicted by the description, as 'suppress' is not described as data destruction.

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 deliver the action, the effect, and the usage condition with zero wasted words. The key behavioral distinction is front-loaded.

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?

This is a simple single-parameter tool with an output schema, annotations, and a clear usage condition. The description covers the operation, its effect, and when to use it, leaving no significant gap for an agent to call it correctly.

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%, and the parameter description already explains where the recommendationId comes from ('from get_house_review'). The tool description adds no new parameter semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('suppress'), a precise resource ('House Review recommendation'), and the observable outcome ('get_house_review stops returning it'). It clearly differentiates from the sibling defer_recommendation by emphasizing permanence.

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 says when to use it: 'Use it when the suggestion does not apply.' It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it over related tools.

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