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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful behavioral fact that active-only filtering is the default, but says nothing about ordering, volume, or what a symptom record contains.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the scoping and filtering constraints front-loaded before any optional details.

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 simple read-only, single-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description covers scope and default filtering adequately. Only the return shape and the explicit meaning of includeResolved are left implicit, which are minor gaps here.

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?

The single parameter includeResolved has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. 'By default active ones only' does imply that resolved symptoms are excluded unless this flag is raised, which meaningfully clarifies the parameter, but it never names or states the flag's effect directly.

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 and resource ('List ... tracked symptoms') plus scope ('signed-in user's') and content format ('severity 1-10 snapshots'). An agent can distinguish it from vora_add_symptom, vora_resolve_symptom, and vora_delete_symptom without reading schemas, though it doesn't name the nearest sibling explicitly.

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?

'By default active ones only' implies the filter context and hints at when to use the default vs. overriding it. There is no explicit when-not or alternative-tool guidance, so usage is only implied.

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