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

Annotations already declare a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining the returned service details and host-dependent rendering as service cards with an inquiry button.

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 front-loaded and packs the service scope and return behavior into one sentence. It is somewhat dense and partly restates the service enum values, but most of the detail earns its place.

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, the description appropriately explains what the result contains: service coverage, fit, deliverables, confirmation points, and card rendering where supported. It does not explain filtering behavior, but that is already well covered by the input schema.

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 coverage is 100%, so the two parameters are already documented. The description adds semantic meaning to the service enum values by mapping them to concrete offerings such as event robots with operators, robot purchase, business deployment, MERA OS, campaigns, and media requests.

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 states that this tool returns MERA services with coverage, fit, deliverables, and pre-commitment confirmation details. It is specific about the resource and content, but does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as request_quote or open_inquiry_form.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like request_quote, open_inquiry_form, or search. The description implies a service catalog and mentions an inquiry button, but does not state selection conditions or exclusions.

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