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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the result contains ten leads, recent source data, specific fields, and that no key is needed, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, whether the data is static or live, or any rate limits.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that states the sample size and source first, then enumerates the key contents and the no-key access condition. There is no redundant or wasted language.

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 simple, parameterless sample-data tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it explains what is returned and what fields are included. It could be slightly stronger by clarifying how this differs from the sibling lead tools or whether the sample is static.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline for a parameterless tool is 4, and nothing in the description creates confusion about inputs.

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 identifies the resource as ten real sample leads from a recent LeadMarmot file and lists the included fields. It distinguishes itself somewhat through 'sample' and 'No key needed', though it does not explicitly compare itself to the sibling tools 'lead' and 'leads'.

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 phrase 'No key needed' implies a usage context, likely for quick access or demonstration without authentication. However, the description gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus 'lead' or 'leads', nor does it state exclusions or alternatives.

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