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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds only that describe_operation exposes native request schemas, with no mention of what the stats endpoint aggregates, scoping, or freshness/period 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?

It is short, but the same sentence is repeated verbatim, so space is wasted rather than earned. The operation ID and describe_operation pointer are useful metadata but the rest is redundant.

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, no documented parameters, and a nested free-form query object, the description should explain what the stats overview returns and how to scope it. It does none of that, leaving only the describe_operation pointer as a fallback.

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% and the two parameters (query, params) are entirely opaque. The description provides no parameter meaning, format, or example, and defers entirely to describe_operation rather than compensating.

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 only restates the endpoint URL, which duplicates the title and tool name exactly. It implies a read of lease statistics but never states what the overview contains (counts, totals, breakdowns) or what distinguishes it from siblings like get_leases_eeab45c45fa700898de650fe or get_leases_critical_date_matrix.

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?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative is named. The only routing hint is a pointer to describe_operation for request schemas, which is about schema discovery, not tool selection.

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