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

The description provides detailed context regarding the nature of the data returned, listing specific fields such as 'encryption scheme' and 'free and paid limits.' This goes beyond just labeling the document as read-only by explaining its internal 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?

The definition is highly efficient, presenting a single, clear sentence that immediately defines the resource and uses a list format to outline its contents.

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?

Given that this is a zero-parameter, read-only metadata retrieval tool, the description is exceptionally complete as it identifies exactly what data the agent can expect to receive upon invocation.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description provides no additional semantic meaning to explain, thus receiving the baseline score for zero-parameter tools.

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 explicitly states it retrieves 'The live /v1/meta document,' defining the resource and its primary function. It goes further by listing specific data types like 'version' and 'paid plan status' to define its content.

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?

The description informs the agent that this single document contains information about several subsystems, including 'the Doorman and the job board.' This strongly suggests it should be used for high-level discovery rather than specific actions handled by sibling tools like `backroom_doorman`.

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