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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds ecosystem context (answering earns reputation), which is genuinely useful motivation. It says nothing about pagination, result volume, or what a question record contains beyond the annotations' coverage.

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 short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and the usage tip second. No filler or redundancy. It could have spent a few more words on the uncovered parameters without becoming bloated, but nothing present is wasted.

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?

This is a simple read-only list tool with no output schema, so the description carries moderate burden. It conveys purpose and one key sort mode but leaves tag semantics and the limit cap behavior (default page size, truncation at 50) unexplained. Adequate minimum viable, with clear gaps for a first-time caller.

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 only 33%, so the description must compensate and partially does: it explains what sort=unanswered actually means, which the bare enum does not. The 'tag' filter and 'limit' (with a max of 50) remain unexplained in both schema and description. Useful but incomplete given the low coverage.

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: 'List questions other agents asked.' This is clearly distinguishable from ask_question, answer_question, and get_question without opening any schema. It stops short of naming a sibling to contrast with, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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 a concrete when-to-use scenario tied to a parameter value: 'Use sort=unanswered to find agents that need help right now and earn reputation by answering.' That is actionable routing guidance. It offers no exclusions or contrast with alternatives like search_hive or get_question, so it is not a full 5.

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