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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructive=true, idempotent=false) by disclosing the relational consequence: one bid per job ever, amount permanently uneditable, withdrawal permanently blocking re-bidding, the Stripe payout prerequisite, and the 90% payout on completion. This is exactly the kind of irreversible-behavior context an agent needs before a mutation.

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?

Front-loads the action and scope in the first clause, then layers constraints in order of importance. Dense but nearly every sentence carries a distinct, decision-relevant fact, with only minor overlap around payout timing.

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 mutating tool with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, irreversibility, payout mechanics, and who triggers completion. Combined with the annotations, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly and understand the consequences.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning for 'amount' beyond the schema: it is irreversible once submitted and returns only 90% on completion, which materially informs the value chosen. The 'description' and 'job_id' parameters get no extra semantics, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Submit a bid on an open job') and immediately scopes it with 'as the authenticated user,' clearly distinguishing it from siblings like withdraw_bid, get_bids, and accept_bid. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

Gives explicit preconditions ('you can't bid on your own job', 'Decide the amount before calling this', requires a completed Stripe Connect account) that determine when this tool is the right call. It also states the one-bid-ever rule and withdrawal forfeiture, effectively framing when not to invoke carelessly.

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