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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, non-open-world behavior. The description adds valuable operational context beyond annotations: only current versions are returned, versions/issue/expiry dates are included, download links expire after 15 minutes, and results are grouped by business when no business is specified.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose, then gives filtering and default-scope behavior, then return-value details. The examples are useful and the description remains compact with no apparent waste.

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 appropriately explains the important return values: version, issue and expiry dates, and a time-limited download link. With annotations covering safety and schema covering parameters, no material information is missing for correct invocation.

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 100%, so all four parameters are already well documented in the schema, including the business/business_id relationship. The description reinforces the filtering behavior and omission semantics but does not add significant parameter detail beyond what the schema provides.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get the current versions of a business's shareable documents') and enumerates the document families covered. It is immediately distinguishable from the sibling tools, which handle business listing, invitations, requests, sharing, status, and questions.

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?

Explains filtering by part number and/or document type and explains the important default behavior when business_id or business is omitted. It does not name explicit when-not-to-use conditions, but the context is clear and there is no competing sibling tool for this resource.

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