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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds beyond that by disclosing the actual runtime behavior: it returns a short notice rather than performing work, which tells the agent not to expect side effects.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with 'Retired.' and the replacement pointer. No wasted text.

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 no-op retired stub with one documented optional param and no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: status, behavior on call, and the correct alternative.

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?

Only one optional parameter (domain) and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents it. The description adds no syntax or meaning beyond that, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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+resource and its status: this is the retired Fix Kit checkout, which no longer performs checkout. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling free_kit that now handles the request.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when not to use it (retired, no longer starts a checkout) and names the replacement (free_kit) for the Customized Fix Kit. Routing is unambiguous.

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