Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description itself does not detail individual parameters, but the phrase 'with provenance surface fields' hints at the purpose of the many correlation/id parameters (e.g., request_id, mandate_id). This is a slight semantic bonus but does not exceed the baseline substantially.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.