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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), so the bar is lower, but the description adds nothing beyond them – no indication of what output the draft takes, whether legal requirements vary by jurisdiction, or how the 'days' parameter influences the notice. The only value is that the name implies a generation operation, consistent with the annotations.

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?

The description is three words long, but this is under-specification rather than conciseness – there is no front-loaded purpose statement, no scope, and nothing for the agent to act on beyond the name.

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 tool with 5 required, entirely undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description should explain at minimum what a draft is (text? file?) and what the inputs mean. It is completely inadequate for that complexity.

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?

All 5 parameters (landlord, tenant, address, date, days) are required and schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions no parameters and gives no hint about date format, what 'days' means (notice period?), or how the fields are used in the draft.

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 "Eviction notice draft" merely restates the tool name and title as a noun phrase, with no verb explaining what the tool actually does (generate? generate from a template? return a PDF?). An agent can guess it produces an eviction notice, but cannot distinguish its behavior from siblings like business_lease_draft or business_nda_draft beyond the document type.

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?

There is no guidance at all on when to use this tool, when not to, prerequisites (e.g., jurisdiction, notice period rules), or which sibling to pick for related documents. Usage is only implied by the tool name.

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