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

Description adds 'Read-only; limit caps results. No API key required.' Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint false. The description confirms read-only and adds specific limits and auth requirements, adding value beyond 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?

Three sentences, each adds value: first states purpose, second gives usage examples, third adds behavioral and auth info. No wasted words, front-loaded with core functionality.

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?

For a simple read-only list tool, description covers purpose, usage, behavioral traits, and auth. No output schema, but the expected result (list of platforms) is clear from context. Minor gap: no mention of pagination or result fields, but not critical.

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?

Description only vaguely mentions 'limit caps results' but does not detail the limit parameter's semantics. Schema coverage is 50% (rationale has description in schema, limit does not). Description fails to compensate for missing schema documentation, adding no new parameter meaning.

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?

Description explicitly states the verb 'list' and specific resource 'smart-contract platforms', with examples (ethereum, bnb, polygon). It also distinguishes from sibling getContracts by noting it provides platform IDs used before calling getContracts.

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?

Description provides explicit use cases: 'which chains are supported for contract lookups', 'list contract platforms', or 'to pick a platform id before calling getContracts'. It does not state when not to use, but the context is clear and alternatives exist among siblings.

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