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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the default page size, what is deliberately omitted (addresses, bank details), and the field set returned. It stops short of explaining pagination via cursor, but that is largely in the schema.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the trigger condition, then the payload shape, then the exclusion. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Complete for a two-parameter, zero-required listing tool. An output schema exists, yet the description helpfully summarizes the returned fields and pagination default, and the omission of addresses/bank details preempts wrong expectations.

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%, so both limit and cursor are fully documented in the schema, which sets the baseline at 3. The description's mention of '25 per page by default' corroborates the limit parameter but adds no cursor semantics beyond the schema.

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 (list businesses) plus the exact fields returned (id, name, currency, country, language, timezone) and the page size. It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling case by noting 'Not for listing customers'.

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?

Gives concrete triggering conditions ('when someone asks which businesses they invoice from, or a business's id is needed') and an explicit exclusion ('Not for listing customers'). An agent can route to or away from this tool without inspecting siblings.

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