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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description contributes that the content is intended for external description of the service, but discloses nothing about length, format, or whether the 'next step' refers to a call to action or a follow-up tool.

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, response content front-loaded in the first, usage directive second. Slightly awkward phrasing ('who it is for, and the next step') but no filler and no repetition of the annotations.

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-parameter, read-only content tool with no output schema, the description tells the agent what it will get and when to fetch it, which is adequate. Only the shape of the returned content (e.g. whether 'the next step' is an offer or an action link) remains unspecified.

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 takes zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies 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 states concretely what the tool returns: an overview of what FindingLeads does, the trades it serves (HVAC, plumbing, roofing, electrical, restoration), its target audience, and the next step. This is far clearer than the vague name 'get_offer' alone, but it never uses an explicit verb and does not distinguish itself from neighbouring info tools like get_pricing or get_pro_site.

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?

'Read this before describing the service to anyone' gives an explicit condition for invoking the tool, which is more than most info tools provide. It names no alternatives and no when-not condition, so the routing to get_pricing vs. this tool is left to inference.

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