Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations only say readOnly=false, idempotent=true, destructive=false; the description adds the real behavior: atomic batch of 1-500, partial patches leave untouched fields intact, schedules and review history are preserved, note type is preserved, removal-triggering edits are refused rather than partially applied, and edits are reversible via restore_cards. That is exactly the beyond-schema context an agent needs before committing a bulk mutation.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.