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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and idempotent. The description adds important behavioral guidance by stating that rates are never published and explicitly telling the agent not to estimate an amount itself, which prevents hallucinated pricing.

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?

The description is two sentences, with the primary content upfront and the critical caveat about pricing in the second sentence. No filler or 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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently conveys the tool's purpose, content scope, and a key behavioral guardrail. It tells the agent what to expect ('how pricing works and what is included') and what not to do ('do not estimate an amount yourself').

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description is not required to explain parameter semantics. The baseline of 4 applies.

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 explicitly states what the tool returns: 'Contract terms, guarantees, oversight and security posture' and 'how pricing works and what is included.' It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like get_booking_link and get_hiring_process, which cover other aspects of the engagement.

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?

It provides clear context that the tool is for commercial terms and includes a boundary—'never an amount'—and instructs not to estimate pricing. It does not name alternative tools explicitly, but the scope is well-defined and the exclusion is explicit.

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