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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral filter ('active completed credentials' and inclusive range boundaries) beyond the annotations, but says nothing about pagination behavior or the fact that a separate state filter exists, which risks ambiguity with 'active completed'.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler and no redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly a symptom of under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

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 6-parameter, paginated list tool with 0% schema documentation and no output schema, the description should cover pagination, the locationIds scoping, and how 'state' interacts with the 'active completed' filter. None of that is present, leaving an agent guessing at call semantics.

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 0% across 6 parameters, so the description must compensate and does not. It clarifies only that from/through are renewal/expiration date boundaries and that the range is inclusive; limit, offset, state, and locationIds are wholly undocumented, including whether 'state' overrides the 'active completed' filter.

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 ('Find') and resource ('credentials') with a clear scope: active, completed, renewal/expiration date inside an inclusive range. It is not, however, differentiated from close siblings such as list_overdue_credentials or review_upcoming_renewals, which an agent could easily confuse with this one.

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?

No statement of when to use this versus list_overdue_credentials, review_upcoming_renewals, or get_my_credentials, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The date-range phrasing implies the use case but leaves the agent to infer sibling routing on its own.

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