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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by revealing that returned amounts are bare numbers without currency and prescribing a prerequisite call to resolve currency_code. It does not discuss pagination, but the schema covers that.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose then the critical currency caveat. No redundant repetition of the title or schema; every sentence earns its place.

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 complete schema coverage, safe read-only annotations, and no output schema, the description supplies the remaining decision-critical context: what the aggregate stats contain and the currency pitfall that would otherwise cause a wrong answer. No material gap for correct invocation remains.

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%, so year, month, page, and per_page are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-specific syntax or filtering guidance, so the baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries parameter semantics.

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 verb 'List' and resource 'monthly dashboard snapshots', and enumerates the aggregate stats returned. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from get_dashboard_snapshot or get_dashboard_summary, so it falls short of a 5 despite the clear scope.

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?

Provides one concrete usage rule: call get_organization_settings for currency_code before stating amounts. However, it gives no guidance on when to choose this list over sibling tools such as get_dashboard_snapshot or get_dashboard_summary, nor when to filter by year or month.

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