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

Annotations already carry readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds substantial behavior beyond that: the tool refuses to make applicability judgments (deferring to the contracting officer), rejects inapplicable contract-type/ground combinations via ground_not_applicable, surfaces excluded grounds via grounds_excluded_by_contract_kind (they don't silently disappear), and warns about quote_truncated items. All non-obvious state changes and limitations are disclosed. 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?

Long, but every sentence earns its place for a genuinely multi-behavior guide tool. Front-loaded with purpose and a direct answer to typical user questions, then organized with a numbered delivery list, a bolded usage sequence, and a cautions paragraph. Bold key terms (must_establish, quote_truncated) aid scanning. No wasted prose.

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 there is no output schema and 0% schema param coverage, the description carries the full burden — and it is complete. It documents the return fields (must_establish, ground_not_applicable, grounds_excluded_by_contract_kind, quote_truncated), the invocation protocol including an ordering constraint relative to estimate_delay_penalty, a partial-day edge case, and the tool's honest limitation (no judgment). Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 0%, so the description bears full responsibility and meets it. Both parameters are explained: contract_kind ('estimate_delay_penalty와 같은 값', maps to a standard-condition family, and warns that the actually-incorporated conditions are the truth source) and ground (omit → full list; specify → one detailed ground). The enum values get contextual meaning, e.g., the sw_requirement_change example clarifies contract-type narrowing. Excellent compensation for the schema gap.

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?

States a specific purpose: a guide to grounds for excluding days from delay penalties (지체일수 불산입), explicitly framed as the companion to estimate_delay_penalty ('estimate_delay_penalty가 정하지 않는 부분'). It names exactly what the tool delivers (three items: grounds list, must_establish facts, precedent replies) and clearly declares what it does NOT do (judge applicability). Distinguishes itself cleanly from the sibling estimate_delay_penalty and search_references.

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?

Gives an explicit usage sequence: narrow grounds → verify must_establish with the user → feed excluded days back into estimate_delay_penalty's excluded_days. Contains a concrete special case (sw_requirement_change counts only 1/2 of days) and a routing rule for truncated quotes (use search_references). No ambiguity about when or how to invoke.

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