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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered by structured data. The description adds real value by enumerating what the returned payload contains, but says nothing about what happens when the report is not yet finished, nor about error behavior for an unknown order_key. With annotations present, a 3 is appropriate.

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?

A single sentence, front-loaded with 'The finished report as data', with the long enumeration compressed into a readable list. It is dense but every clause maps to an actual part of the payload, so nothing is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description does the important work of describing return contents, which is a genuine strength and would otherwise be missing. However, it omits the precondition that the report must be finished and any failure mode, leaving the lifecycle around order_report/check_order unexplained.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains order_key as 'The order_key that order_report gave.' The description never references the parameter at all, so it adds nothing beyond the schema baseline of 3.

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 is a noun phrase enumerating the report's contents ('The finished report as data: how often the AIs named the business...'), which conveys the resource but never states an explicit retrieval verb. It also does nothing to distinguish itself from ask_about_report or get_questions, which target the same report domain. Purpose is inferable but not sharply defined.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus ask_about_report, and no mention of the workflow implied by siblings order_report and check_order (i.e., that a finished order is a prerequisite). The word 'finished' hints at a readiness condition but the agent is left to infer it.

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