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

Annotations already cover read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond annotations by disclosing that no account is needed and describing the checklist's time-based organization, which helps set expectations.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, the usage trigger is stated clearly, and the auth note is compactly included.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, the description provides everything an agent needs: content type, phase organization, trigger scenario, and access requirements. No output schema is necessary for a checklist resource this clearly described.

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 the parameter is already well documented. The description adds some meaning by elaborating the phases ('first 24-48 hours, first week, first month, and ongoing'), but does not substantially exceed what the schema already provides.

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 and resource ('Get the practical checklist of what has to be done after someone dies') and clearly distinguishes this from siblings by focusing on immediate after-death action items rather than estate planning, account connection, or state document requirements.

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 states when to use it: when someone has recently lost a person and is asking what to do, what comes first, or what they might be forgetting. It does not name exclusions or alternatives explicitly, so it falls just short of a 5.

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