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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint=true, so safety is covered; the description still adds real behavioral context: the 15-minute link lifetime, the gated-access precondition, and the exact failure shape (payment_required + pricing page). It stops short of saying what the returned link looks like beyond '15-minute link', but the essentials are disclosed.

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, both front-loaded: the successful behavior first, the failure branch second. No filler, and the key constraint (expiry) appears in the opening clause.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with full schema coverage, the description covers the outcome, the precondition, the expiry, and the error response. Only a note on how the link is returned to the caller would make it fully self-contained.

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% and the single resumeId parameter is already documented there ('A resume id from list_resumes'); the description adds nothing about it. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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 ('downloads the resume as a PDF') plus the artifact returned ('A 15-minute link'), and names the platform. No sibling tool overlaps, so it is unambiguous which tool to pick for PDF export.

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 the condition under which the tool succeeds ('when download access or an unlock covers it') and the fallback path otherwise ('answers payment_required with the pricing page'). It also rules out a related action ('nothing is bought through this tool'). No explicit alternative tool is named, but none exists among siblings.

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