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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description's main job is domain-level context. It delivers that by explaining the tool produces no state change until the customer completes the flow externally ('nothing is ordered until they finish it'), which is meaningful beyond the annotation. It does not describe the exact return shape (one link vs. two fields), leaving a small gap.

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?

Two compact sentences with no filler, and the key behavioral caveat (nothing is ordered yet) is stated up front. The phrasing of the opening clause is slightly convoluted but still short.

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 one-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers what an agent needs: it returns links for the customer, one for ordering and one for a sample, and no order is placed by the call. Only a clearer statement of the exact return contents is missing.

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?

There is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage, and the schema already says the slug comes from search_products. The description adds nothing about the slug or its source, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 conveys that the tool yields two links (order link and sample link) for a garment, which lets an agent infer the general purpose. However, it never states plainly 'returns URLs' with a verb+resource framing; it describes output obliquely as 'The link that takes the customer...'. Sibling tools like get_quote and get_product are not differentiated.

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?

'Give these to the customer; nothing is ordered until they finish it' implies when to use it (customer wants to proceed to order or sample) and clarifies no order is placed. There is no explicit when-not or guidance on choosing between the order link and the sample link vs. other tools like get_quote.

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