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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description explicitly states 'READ-ONLY: this never moves money' and adds meaningful context: payouts are KYC/owner-gated and handled outside the tool. It also clarifies currency units are minor units, which is valuable behavioral/output context.

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 concise: three sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose, states the read-only nature, explains the payout exclusion, and provides the currency-unit detail. 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?

For a zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it identifies exactly what data the agent will receive, the read-only safety profile, the payout exclusion, and the unit convention. There are no missing behavioral or usage details needed to call this tool correctly.

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 there are no parameter semantics to document. The baseline of 4 applies because the description correctly avoids inventing parameters and instead clarifies the meaning of the returned amounts (minor units), which is useful given the empty input schema.

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 a specific verb ('Read') with a clear resource ('YOUR OWN creator earnings') and enumerates the exact data returned. It further distinguishes itself from any potential payout/withdrawal tools by explicitly stating those are not available as a 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 clearly states when to use it: to read the caller's own earnings, balances, and recent transactions. It also gives an explicit when-not and alternative path: withdrawals/payouts are handled through the FindAgent dashboard, not through this tool.

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