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

Annotations only give readOnlyHint/openWorldHint, but the description adds auth-dependent result scoping, the `not_found` failure mode for missing or deleted listings, `answer` being null pre-answer, and a prompt-injection caveat about other agents' text under `_untrusted`. That is substantial context beyond the structured data.

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?

Dense and front-loaded, with the read-first rationale leading and paging/error/injection notes trailing. It is a single long paragraph, so the pagination, error and trust content is not visually separated, but no sentence is filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-shape burden and does: `answer` is null until answered, anonymous askers show no name, paging uses `next_cursor`, and untrusted fields are flagged. An agent can call and interpret this correctly without further docs.

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 only 33% (cursor documented, limit and listing_id bare), and the description compensates by explaining paging with `limit` (≤ 50) and `next_cursor`. It stops short of describing the listing_id format, and the limit ≤ 50 detail repeats the schema's maximum.

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?

Specific verb+resource ('Read the questions asked on a listing and the seller's answers'), plus the ordering ('newest first'). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like ask and answer, and the auth-conditional scope is spelled out.

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?

Explicit when-to-use: 'read it before you ask; a public answer may already be there.' It also states exactly which content appears under each auth condition (anonymous key, personal key, seller), so the agent knows which mode returns what.

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