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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds value by disclosing pagination ('Returns paginated results') and sort order ('sorted by creation date, newest first'). This goes beyond the structured annotations and helps the agent understand response behavior.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action ('List...'), followed by behavioral details and usage guidance. Each sentence earns its place and there is no redundant or filler content.

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?

Combining the annotations (read-only, idempotent), full schema documentation, and behavioral additions (paginated, sorted), the description is complete enough for this simple list tool. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the predictable nature of a paginated list, and no critical gaps are evident.

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?

All three parameters (limit, offset, status) are fully described in the schema with 100% coverage. The description only says 'optional filtering' generically, adding no new parameter details. With high schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the tool's action and resource: 'List property verification missions with optional filtering.' The verb 'List' and resource 'property verification missions' are specific and differentiate from siblings like get_mission (single) and get_nearby_missions.

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 provides explicit context: 'Use this to browse available missions on the HomeVisto platform.' It tells the agent when to use the tool but does not mention alternative tools or exclusions, such as when search_missions or get_nearby_missions might be more appropriate.

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