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

Goes beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by disclosing the visibility constraint (templates homed outside your locations are hidden) and the required permission scope `emergency-override.view`. The 'Read-only' restatement is redundant with annotations, but the auth and scoping details are genuinely additive.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences with the resource, the downstream handoff, the scope caveat, and the permission requirement front-loaded. No filler and no repetition of structured data.

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?

An output schema exists, so return shapes need not be documented, and the description still names the key fields (ids, scope, severity). Between the permission requirement, visibility scope, and the id-handoff warning, an agent has everything needed to call this 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the schema carries no per-parameter burden and the baseline is 4. The description's mention of 'Pass an id' refers to the sibling trigger tool rather than an input here, which could momentarily confuse but harms nothing.

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 ('List the pre-armed emergency takeover templates') and disambiguates with concrete examples (Lockdown, Severe weather, Fire drill). It also names the fields returned (ids, scope, severity) and distinguishes itself from the write-side sibling trigger_emergency_template.

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 routes the agent to trigger_emergency_template and warns 'never guess' an id, implying this list must be consulted first. It also states a scope condition (templates homed outside your locations are not shown). It stops short of an explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use statement but the downstream routing is clear.

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