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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description reinforces this with 'Read-only.' Beyond that, it discloses result ordering (newest first), result content (actions and balance changes), pagination mechanics via nextCursor, and the historical validity window 2021-07-26 to 2023-09-28. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotation.

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 two dense sentences with no wasted wording. The key scoping information and pagination instruction are front-loaded and easy to scan.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by stating what results include (actions and balance changes), their order, and pagination behavior. It also supplies the historical date bounds for Olympia, which is essential context for an agent calling this 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline would be 3. The description nonetheless adds meaning: the range is inclusive and between two UTC days, and the schema's `before` parameter is explicitly identified as the previous page's nextCursor. That clarifies how to use the parameter beyond its schema description.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Every Olympia transaction between two UTC days') and adds defining scope: newest-first ordering and inclusion of actions and balance changes. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like olympia_get_account_transactions, which is account-scoped rather than date-scoped.

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 makes the use case clear: retrieve all Olympia transactions in a UTC date window, with inclusive bounds noted. It also gives the pagination instruction to pass nextCursor as `before`. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as olympia_get_account_transactions, so it falls short of full when/when-not guidance.

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