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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's 'Read-only' repeats structured data. It does add one genuinely useful fact: 'no signature', telling the agent this is a free query rather than a signed transaction. No rate limits or return-shape context beyond that.

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 tight sentences, the primary action front-loaded, with no filler. The trailing 'for caller-dependent results' phrase is slightly cryptic but costs little space.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema and annotations already covering the safety profile, the description covers purpose, safety, and the caller role. The only real gap is what happens when `caller` is omitted, which an agent must infer.

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 description coverage is 100% with a single optional parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description restates that `caller` is 'the account whose view to read' but adds no format or default-value detail beyond the schema's 'Optional account address (SS58) to run the query as'.

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 (List) and resource (exchange listings) scoped to those created by `caller`, which cleanly separates it from the sibling geode_exchange_browse_all_listings. An agent can pick it 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?

Usage is implied by the 'my listings' scoping rather than stated; the description never names browse_all_listings as the alternative or says when to pass `caller` versus omitting it. The clause 'for caller-dependent results' hints at a default-caller behavior but does not spell out the condition.

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