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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the funnel phases, free nature, and exit mechanism. It does not detail side effects or data persistence, but the funnel is inherently interactive and low-risk, making this sufficient.

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?

Extremely concise (two sentences) yet packs all essential info. Front-loaded with 'START HERE' as a clear directive. Every word adds value.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, phases, and key parameters. No output schema is present, but the funnel phases imply a conversational flow. Lacking explicit details on what each phase returns, but likely sufficient for an agent to navigate. Minor gap: no mention of error handling or unexpected inputs.

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% (only symbol described), but the description adds rich semantics: explains phase enum values, specifies that symbol works only for GC=F in the sample phase, and clarifies interest:false exits the funnel. This fully compensates for the schema gaps.

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 this as the entry point funnel for the commodities signal agent, with a specific verb ('pitch') and resource (subscription funnel). It distinguishes from siblings by referencing evaluate_symbol for the sample phase and explicitly stating this is the first call.

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?

Explicitly states the tool must be the first call and provides guidance for exiting (interest:false). It does not explicitly list when not to use it, but the funnel context implies alternative tools are for later steps. Could be improved with a 'when to use' vs 'when not to use' distinction.

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