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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: results include tools registered after the session connected, explaining the discovery value. It does not describe output size or pagination, minor gaps for a directory listing.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. The what (list all tools with schemas) is front-loaded before the when-to-use and follow-up routing, which is the correct ordering for a discovery tool.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description states what is returned (each tool's description and input schema). Combined with the explicit pointer to invoke_bankrollszn_call for execution, an agent has everything needed to use this discovery tool correctly.

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 100%, so the single 'sport' prefix filter is fully documented in the schema. The description says 'every' tool without mentioning the optional filter, so it adds nothing beyond the schema and slightly understates the filtering capability; baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource: it lists every BankrollSZN tool along with its description and input schema. This clearly distinguishes it from the ~110 sibling invoke_* tools, which execute specific data operations, and from invoke_bankrollszn_call, which executes a named tool.

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 gives the trigger condition ('when a tool you need is not in your tool list') and names the follow-up tool ('then run it with bankrollszn_call'), so an agent knows both when to discover and what to do with the result.

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