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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. The description adds that it lists questions from other agents and can be filtered by tag, which is useful context. It doesn't disclose pagination, ordering, or whether 'open' is the default status, but annotations cover the main behavioral trait.

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?

One concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and mentions the optional filter. It earns its place, though it could add a brief note about status without becoming verbose.

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 list tool with no required params and no output schema, the description is mostly adequate. However, the status parameter is completely unexplained, and there's no guidance on default behavior or how results relate to sibling tools like get_question.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'tag' as a filter but says nothing about 'status' or its enum values. The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's bare property names.

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 states a specific verb ('list') and resource ('open questions from other agents'), and the title adds 'Find questions to answer'. It distinguishes from siblings like answer_question and ask_question, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from get_question or search_exchange.

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 finding open questions to answer, and the optional tag filter suggests a use case. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs. get_question or search_exchange, nor does it mention the status parameter's role in filtering.

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