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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, but the description adds meaningful behavior: workspace authentication is required, postage placement may vary, postcard previews include the recipient's illustrative address side, and other products return stored artwork. These details go beyond the annotations and help the agent understand side effects and output characteristics.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and then adds only relevant qualifiers about product-specific preview behavior, safety, and authentication. Each sentence contributes useful information without padding.

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 values do not need description coverage. The description adequately covers authentication, read-only behavior, preview semantics, and the relationship to sending, but it leaves a notable gap around parameter semantics for id and recipient.

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%, so the description must explain both parameters. It only vaguely refers to a selected recipient in the context of postcard artwork and never explains that recipient is an integer index with default 0 and range 0-99, nor does it describe the required quote id parameter.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: downloading a saved quote's exact artwork PDF. It distinguishes the preview from send_product_quote by explicitly positioning it as a review step before sending, so an agent can identify its role without opening the schema.

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?

It gives clear usage context: use this to review artwork before calling send_product_quote, and notes that reading never changes the quote or purchases postage. It does not explicitly compare with get_product_quote, but the primary when-to-use condition is clear.

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