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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the neutral annotations: each query costs 0.01 USDC, there is a 20-query-per-session cap, and it is part of a funded-session workflow. However, it does not disclose billing side effects on the session balance, receipt behavior, or failure modes, which would be valuable for a paid query operation.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the core purpose first, then pricing and limits, then the required sequence. Every sentence adds useful information without fluff or repetition.

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?

While the workflow, pricing, and listing are clear, the tool has no output schema and the description does not describe what the query returns, what query syntax is expected, or how receipts factor in. Given five parameters and a paid data retrieval operation, this leaves important gaps for an agent trying to call it 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?

Schema description coverage is only 40%, so the description needed to compensate, but it provides no parameter-level guidance. It never explains query content, the k limit, delivery_receipt, or sandbox_receipt, and only implies session_id through the workflow sequence.

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 identifies the tool as a pay-per-query data access operation targeting 'live data listings,' names the specific listing and price, and distinguishes it from the free data_preview path. The sequence data_session_open → data_session_fund → data_session_query removes ambiguity about which step this tool performs.

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 points to data_preview for a free first taste and gives the required sequence of session open, fund, then query. It does not exhaustively state when not to use the tool, but the workflow context is clear and actionable.

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