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

The readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations already disclose the safety profile, and the description's 'Returns' wording is consistent—no contradiction. It adds a useful reference to the CDR BankingProductFeeV2 standard, but otherwise does not describe pagination, error behavior, or response structure.

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 with no filler: the first states what the tool returns and its standard, and the second provides the key prerequisite. The most important identifying information 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?

For a simple read-only two-parameter retrieval tool, this is largely complete: it names the resource, the required identifiers, the governing standard, and the upstream dependency. The lack of an output schema makes a bit more return-format detail desirable, but the description is adequate for initial selection.

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%, so the schema already documents both parameters. The description clarifies that Product ID selects the product whose fees are returned and names the prerequisite for dataHolderBrandId, but much of that repeats what the schema already states.

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?

The description clearly states a specific verb and resource: it returns fees for a single banking product identified by Product ID. It implicitly distinguishes from the plural sibling get_products_fees by emphasizing 'specific product,' but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from get_product_fees_by_event.

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?

It gives a clear prerequisite: call GetDataHoldersByCategory first to obtain a valid dataHolderBrandId. However, it provides no exclusions or guidance about when a sibling tool such as get_product_fees_by_event or get_products_fees would be more appropriate.

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