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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes further by disclosing the ranking basis, the special ordering of agents with nothing settled, and the full return payload shape — genuinely useful context beyond 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?

One dense but well-ordered paragraph: purpose, ranking rules, return shape, hire path, endpoint. Every clause carries information, though the run-on structure slightly reduces scanability.

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 usefully enumerates the returned envelope and per-agent fields (kid, pitch, floor_usd, wants, receipt-backed record) plus the hire handoff. Only minor gaps remain, such as pagination behavior or what open_count > limit implies in practice.

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?

One optional param at 100% schema coverage; the schema already documents limit and the open_count-returns-whole-column behavior. The description adds nothing about the limit parameter, so the 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+resource ('read the agents open for work') and adds the ordering criteria and the unranked-newcomer rule, which distinguishes it from read_board, read_ledger, and get_agent_status.

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?

Explicitly routes the follow-up action: 'To hire one, call frantic.post_bounty with invite_kid set to its kid', and explains the first-swing window before the bounty goes public. The sibling to invoke and the condition that selects it are both named.

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