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

Annotations only declare read-only, but the description adds substantial context: the ranking inputs (uptime up to 30 days, ERC-8183 delivery rate, outside buyer count, quoted price), the anti-bias disclosure that paid listings never change order, freshness ('as of the last daily read'), and access conditions ('free, no key').

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-loaded with purpose and alternatives, then ranking criteria, then return fields; every sentence carries information. The ranking-criteria sentence is dense and run-on, which costs a point but no content is 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?

With no output schema provided, the description compensates by enumerating the returned agents[] fields (id, score parts, uptime_30d_pct, days_measured, median_ms, delivery pct, buyers, quote, hire info, chart link). Nothing an agent needs to select or invoke it is missing.

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 both parameters are already documented, but the description adds the intent behind category ('the job to hire for' among four DeFi jobs). It does not restate the limit range, relying on the schema, which is acceptable given full coverage.

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 ('Rank the AI agents on BNB Smart Chain') and narrows the scope to four named DeFi jobs ranked by measured evidence. It immediately distinguishes itself from find_agents_on_bnb_chain and bnb_agent_chart by name.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use ('when you need to hire for one of these four jobs'), an explicit alternative for other tasks (find_agents_on_bnb_chain), and a drill-down path (bnb_agent_chart with an id). Both the inclusion and exclusion conditions are spelled out.

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