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

The description aligns with annotations (idempotentHint) by mentioning a 'durable idempotency key.' It adds context about required consents but does not describe side effects or success/failure outcomes.

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, front-loaded sentence that includes the key action and constraints with no unnecessary words.

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 the output schema, return values are not needed. The description covers purpose and key constraints but lacks preconditions (e.g., application state). Overall, it is fairly complete for a submit tool with idempotency.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description explains 5 of 6 parameters (expectedVersion, creditCheckConsentAccepted, truthConfirmationAccepted, consentVersion, idempotencyKey) but omits sessionToken, leaving a 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?

The description clearly states the action (submit), resource (email-verified application for review), and key constraints (exact version, consent, idempotency key). It distinguishes from siblings like 'applications.start' and 'applications.update'.

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 for submission after preparation but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention preconditions or when not to use it.

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