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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context — 'no signature' signals no signing/auth step is required, and it explains the caller-dependent behavior. Return format remains unspecified but the annotation bar is met.

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 with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by the safety/auth note and the parameter clarification. Nothing is wasted.

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 single-optional-param read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, auth posture, and parameter intent. It could say more about what 'products and services' entails, but it is essentially complete for correct invocation.

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% for the single caller param, so the schema already documents it. The description's phrasing 'the account whose view to read (for caller-dependent results)' adds a marginal nuance but largely restates the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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: 'Get caller's own Marketplace seller account, including its products and services.' The 'seller' qualifier distinguishes it from the parallel geode_market_view_my_buyer_account, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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 only implied: it clarifies this is a read-only call needing no signature and explains the optional caller for caller-dependent results. It never states when to prefer this over geode_market_view_my_buyer_account or the seller-orders variants.

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