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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds that the tool describes query facets (filters, groupings, metrics, etc.), which is useful but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like output format or error handling. No contradiction with annotations.

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 description is a single concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 describe tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description fully covers the tool's scope by enumerating what it describes (filters, groupings, metrics, detail fields, citation fields). No additional context is needed.

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 baseline is 4. The description accurately represents the tool's no-input nature and describes what it returns conceptually, which is sufficient for a describe tool.

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 the tool's purpose: to describe valid filters, groupings, metrics, detail fields, and citation fields for the specific dataset 'space.satellite_filings'. This is a specific verb+resource that distinguishes it from sibling describe tools for other datasets and from the corresponding query tool.

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 the tool is used to discover query options for satellite_filings, but it does not explicitly state when to use it (e.g., before running queries) or contrast it with query_space_satellite_filings_v1. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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