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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only lists the returned data points (MRR, ARR, active subscribers, recent payments, plan breakdown). It doesn't disclose potential caveats like authentication requirements, data freshness, or whether the data is for a connected account. For a read-only 'get' tool, this is acceptable but not thorough.

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?

A single sentence front-loads the verb and resource, then lists the dashboard contents via an em dash. Every word earns its place, and the structure is optimal for a tool with no parameters.

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 parameterless read tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what data will be returned. It could mention whether the dashboard is for the connected Stripe account or include a note about data freshness, but the coverage is strong given the tool's simplicity.

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 provides full coverage by definition. The description has nothing to add beyond the schema, and per the baseline rule, a score of 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'Stripe revenue dashboard' and enumerates distinct metrics (MRR, ARR, active subscribers, recent payments, plan breakdown), clearly distinguishing it from sibling get_* tools like get_quickbooks or get_salesforce. It leaves no ambiguity about what data this tool retrieves.

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 provides clear context by naming Stripe revenue metrics, implying that this tool is the right choice when Stripe dashboard data is needed. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the resource specificity makes the use case obvious among the many get_* siblings.

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