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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds the geographic scope and the fact that it includes refunds, but does not disclose pagination or filtering limitations beyond what the schema already covers. No contradiction with 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?

Two sentences with no filler, front-loaded with the core purpose and then the scope constraint. Every word earns its place.

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?

Despite being brief, the description, combined with the highly detailed schema for the criteria parameter and the annotations, gives an agent sufficient context to call the tool correctly. The output format is not described, but there is no output schema and the search behavior is adequately covered by the criteria documentation.

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 the schema thoroughly documents both 'company' and 'criteria' (including operators, filtering rules, pagination, and truncation). The description adds the geographic restriction but does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides. 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 ('Search') and resource ('tax payment records in QuickBooks Online'), and adds distinguishing context: sales tax payments/refunds and the AU/CA/UK geographic scope. This clearly separates it from other search tools in the sibling list.

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?

The description implies usage for sales tax payment records but does not explicitly compare to alternatives like get_tax_payment or search_tax_agencies. The geographic restriction is a useful usage constraint, but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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