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

The description discloses that the tool sends messages via SMS and team channels, which are side effects beyond the read/write hints. It also mentions the plan requirement. However, it does not detail what happens if called multiple times (idempotency) or potential limits.

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, no wasted words, front-loaded with the core purpose and key details. Highly efficient.

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 tool with three optional parameters and an output schema, the description covers the key aspects: summary content, delivery methods, and plan requirement. It might miss mentioning that it's likely a one-time generation (not scheduling), but overall sufficient.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add significant new meaning beyond the schema, as the schema already describes each parameter's purpose.

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 generates an end-of-day business summary with specific content (leads, quotes, jobs, revenue, schedule) and sends it via SMS and team channels. The verb 'generate' and resource 'daily summary' are specific, and the description distinguishes it from the many sibling workflow tools.

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 at end-of-day and mentions a plan requirement ('Requires Starter+ plan'), but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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