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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, and the description reinforces 'Read-only, free', adding context about the data origin (Heista-curated) and filtering behavior (mutual exclusivity). No contradictions, full disclosure.

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?

Two sentences pack all essential information: purpose, nature, filtering, pagination. No filler words, front-loaded with key concepts. 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?

Given no output schema, the description doesn't detail return structure, but it characterizes the content adequately ('cluster-level structural formulas'). Combined with 100% parameter docs and strong annotations, it provides sufficient context for a listing tool.

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 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining the mutual exclusivity of only_workspace and only_official, comparing to the 'in-app library lens', and clarifying brand_id's scope limitation. This goes beyond the 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 clearly states it lists 'cluster-level structural formulas derived from decoded ads' and distinguishes it from other list tools by specifying its unique content (Heista-curated, generation parameter) and filter options (only_workspace/only_official), setting it apart from siblings like list_decoded_ad_presets.

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 usage for retrieving ad formula presets, with explicit filtering and pagination instructions. While it doesn't contrast directly with get_ad_formula_preset, the sibling context makes the distinction clear, and the mutual exclusivity of filters is well explained.

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