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

Annotations already indicate a safe, read-only, idempotent operation. The description adds the specific scope of the metadata (filters, groupings, metrics, detail fields, citation fields), which outlines what the agent can expect. It does not contradict any annotations, though it adds no further behavioral context like auth or rate limits, which are likely unnecessary.

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?

One concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then lists the covered items. No wasted words.

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 the simple nature of a describe tool and the presence of an output schema, the description is sufficient. It enumerates the metadata categories and the title resolves the MISO specificity. It does not explicitly connect to the query tool, but that is not required for a describe operation.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description's role is minimal. The baseline of 4 applies; the description correctly lists the metadata categories rather than attempting to document nonexistent parameters.

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 uses the specific verb 'Describe' with a clear resource ('power.interconnection_queue') and enumerates the exact types of information it provides (filters, groupings, metrics, detail fields, citation fields). The title distinguishes this as the MISO-specific describe tool, differentiating it from regional siblings.

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 implies its usage: it provides metadata needed before querying the dataset. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over the other regional describe tools, nor does it reference the corresponding query tool. The title adds regional context but no explicit exclusions or alternatives are given.

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