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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It only states the action and that it is free, but does not disclose idempotency, side effects, data handling, or other behavioral traits. Minimal behavioral context.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with 'FREE feedback tool', every word adds value. No redundant information.

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 feedback tool, it covers purpose, parameters with ranges, and usage timing. However, it does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., confirmation message), which leaves some incompleteness given no output schema.

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 description must add meaning. It does so by specifying 'score 1-10' (applying a range), and 'pros and cons' (purpose of the string fields). This adds significant value beyond the schema's simple type definitions.

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 it is a feedback tool for rating after trading on signals, with verb 'leave a rating' and resource 'signals'. It distinguishes from siblings (evaluate_symbol, pitch, etc.) which are analysis 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?

Explicitly says 'after trading on our signals', indicating when to use. Mentions 'No payment needed' as a constraint, but does not provide exclusions or direct comparison to siblings. Nevertheless, context is clear.

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