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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions comparing 2-5 products and returning a structured table, but lacks details on data freshness, performance implications, or error handling. Basic behavioral info is present, but no depth beyond the stated purpose.

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?

Single, clear sentence front-loading purpose and key details. No filler; every part 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 comparison tool with no output schema, description covers main purpose, scope (2-5 products), key dimensions, and output type. Missing error handling or behavior for invalid inputs, but still provides sufficient context for correct invocation.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. The description adds context by linking age and gender to precise premium calculation and listing comparison dimensions, which enriches understanding beyond the schema alone.

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?

Description clearly states verb (compare), resource (2-5 products), key dimensions (premium, coverage, deductible, renewal), and output (structured comparison table). It effectively distinguishes from siblings like get_product_detail (single product) and search_products (search).

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?

Usage is implied by the description (use when comparing multiple products), but it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. No exclusions or when-not-to guidance provided.

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