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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the bar is lower. The description adds value by disclosing that the tool returns a URL (not feed data itself), mentions 'feed v2,' and lists the verification metadata fields included. This goes beyond the minimal safety profile.

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 two sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the purpose and return value; the second adds a relevant detail about feed contents. Every sentence 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only, idempotent tool, the description adequately communicates what is returned (URL), why it's used (canonical catalog snapshot), and a content detail (verification metadata). No output schema exists, but the description covers the return type adequately. Minor gaps such as URL format or authentication are not critical for this simple tool.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully describes the input signature. The baseline for 0-param tools is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter explanations.

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 clearly states the tool returns a specific resource: 'the URL of the droplinked Stripe ACP product feed.' The purpose is further clarified as enabling the agent to 'fetch the canonical catalog snapshot,' which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_product or search_products.

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 the tool is for obtaining a canonical catalog snapshot, but it does not explicitly contrast this with alternatives (e.g., get_product for individual products) or state when not to use it. Usage context is present but no exclusions or alternatives are named.

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