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

Annotations show destructiveHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, indicating mutation but not destruction. The description adds that the tool sends escalating reminders and includes Stripe links, but does not detail what happens to records or whether actions are reversible. No contradictions.

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, front-loaded with main action, no extraneous detail. Each sentence adds value: action, usage, requirement.

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 tool has zero required params, full schema coverage, and an output schema, the description is complete. It covers purpose, usage, and prerequisites without missing critical information.

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% and both parameters have clear descriptions. The description adds context about escalation tones, but does not significantly extend beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's purpose: 'Auto-chase overdue invoices with escalating SMS + email reminders (friendly → firm → final). Includes Stripe payment links.' It identifies the resource (overdue invoices) and the specific behavior (escalating reminders with payment links). Differentiates from sibling 'invoicing.chase' by mentioning escalation.

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 provides clear instructions: 'Pass jobId to chase specific invoice, or omit to scan all overdue.' It also states the requirement 'Requires Growth+ plan.' However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to sibling tools like invoicing.chase.

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