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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that default output omits download URLs and that full metadata requires a specific profile and reason, which is important behavior not obvious from the name or schema. It could mention pagination or errors, but the core caveat is covered.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the purpose and immediately follows with the most important behavioral caveat. Every word earns its place; no redundant or filler content.

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 description covers the main behavioral nuance but lacks details about response shape, pagination behavior, and error handling. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, the agent would need to infer some of these from the parameter schema and sibling tools. Adequate but not fully complete.

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 high (86%), so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the default operational profile and linking full metadata to the detail_profile and reason parameters, giving agent-motivating context beyond the schema descriptions.

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?

Description uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('file metadata for a Lever opportunity'), clearly distinguishing it from get/download/delete file sibling tools. It also clarifies the output is metadata, not file content or download URLs.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool (listing file metadata for an opportunity) and actionable guidance on using detail_profile=full with a reason when full metadata is needed. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but the context is clear enough.

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