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

Beyond the annotations, the description reveals key behavioral details: it returns a checkout URL, payment is handled by Paddle in the browser, card details should never be shared in the tool, and several possible return states (already_free, already_owned, checkout_not_live) are disclosed. No contradiction with readOnlyHint=false or destructiveHint=false.

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 dense but every sentence serves a purpose: defining the action, explaining the browser flow, warning against sharing card details, and enumerating the distinct output states. The most important information is front-loaded.

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 single-parameter tool with an output schema present, the description covers the input origin, the browser-based payment flow, post-purchase next steps, and all relevant status outcomes. An agent has enough context to invoke it correctly without further investigation.

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 schema already has a single parameter with full coverage, so the description is not required to compensate. It still adds marginal value by clarifying the slug comes from findagent_browse_agents, but it does not need to go further.

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 opening phrase 'Get a browser checkout link to PURCHASE a paid FindAgent agent' states a specific verb, resource, and outcome. It is clearly differentiated from related tools like findagent_add_connector and findagent_browse_agents based on the purchase-oriented role.

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 explicitly gives routing guidance: use findagent_add_connector for free agents, retry it after a paid purchase settles, and fall back to findagent_browse_agents for unknown slugs. This makes the when-to-use decision explicit rather than implied.

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