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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and a closed-world scope, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing further: no mention of what unified periods represent, pagination, or whether results are scoped to a specific CAM year.

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 short but wastes one of its two sentences on an exact duplicate of the endpoint path. The remaining content is a pointer to describe_operation rather than substantive information.

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, 0% parameter coverage, and a nested free-form query object, the description should explain return shape and filtering. It defers everything to describe_operation, so an agent cannot call this correctly without a second round trip.

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 0%, so the description must compensate and does not. It never explains that leaseId is the path parameter nor what the free-form 'query' object accepts, leaving both parameters undocumented.

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 restates the endpoint path twice and names no verb or outcome beyond 'GET'. It conveys the resource (unified periods for a lease) only indirectly through the URL template, matching the title verbatim rather than explaining what the operation returns.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no differentiation from the many sibling get_cam_leases_by_leaseId_* tools. The only routing hint is a pointer to describe_operation for native schemas, which is not usage guidance.

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