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

The description adds substantial behavior beyond the annotations: one bounded step per call, up to 25 people per step, continuation semantics, paused/resume handling, hourly analysis limits, and skipped rows. These details are important for a non-readonly, non-idempotent mutation tool and do not contradict the annotations.

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 dense but front-loaded, starting with the core action and then layering in continuation, pause, analysis, and no-op conditions. Every sentence carries useful operational meaning with no 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?

Given the mutation behavior, lack of output schema, and stepwise import semantics, the description is complete enough to invoke and continue the tool correctly. It covers the key state signals (`more`, `resume_at`, `busy`) and analysis-limit behavior.

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 `analyze` parameter is explained well, including first-call-only behavior and hourly analysis limits. However, `import_id` is undocumented in both the schema and the description, leaving half of the parameters without added semantic guidance.

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 states a specific verb and resource: start or continue an import in bounded steps. It clearly scopes the operation to post-preview use and continuation, but it does not explicitly name sibling tools such as get_import, cancel_import, or import_people for differentiation.

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 gives explicit conditions for use: after the user has seen the preview, call again while `more` is true, and resume after `resume_at` when paused. It also states that `busy=true` means another step was running and the call did nothing.

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