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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior, so the description doesn't need to repeat safety. It adds useful details: ordering ('most-documented first') and what data is returned ('counts of reports, themes and sources'), which go 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then the optional filters. No wasted words.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description provides enough to understand what will be returned (collections with counts) and how to filter. It doesn't describe pagination behavior beyond the schema, but that's covered by the 'limit' and 'offset' parameters.

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?

The schema has full coverage, so the parameters are well-documented. The description adds the concept of 'name or domain fragment' for the 'q' parameter, clarifying that it searches both fields, which is extra semantic value.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('software products that have a page on Friction'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_product_summary (single product) and search_items (items). It also specifies ordering and what counts are included.

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 implies usage context—listing a catalog of products with optional filters—which is distinct from fetching a single summary or searching items. It doesn't explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention exclusions.

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