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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns information about the service, cost, and next step. It doesn't mention whether it's read-only, but for an informational tool with no parameters, the risk is low. It could be more explicit about what the output looks like, but the description is adequate.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the key content (what, cost, next step), and ends with a clear usage directive. No wasted words.

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 0-parameter informational tool with no output schema, the description is complete enough. It tells the agent what content to expect and when to use it. It could mention the format of the output, but that's minor 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 0 parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The description doesn't need to explain parameters. Baseline 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter 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 states a specific purpose: it explains what FindingLeads does, its cost, and the next step. It is clear about the resource (FindingLeads service) and the content of the response. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings, but the content is distinct enough from estimate_missed_call_cost and list_trades.

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 gives a clear usage context: 'Read this before describing the service to anyone.' This tells the agent when to use it (before describing the service). It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for a 0-parameter informational tool.

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