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

The readOnlyHint annotation is consistent with the description's statement that nothing is registered by this call. The description also adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: no account or token is needed, and tokens are configured by the human rather than exchanged in chat.

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 with the core purpose, followed by when to use, notes, and an example. Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary detail.

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 zero-parameter, read-only informational tool, the description covers purpose, usage conditions, side effects, authentication context, and example arguments. No output schema is present, but the tool's explanatory nature is clear enough that return-value details are not required.

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 document. The description includes an empty example arguments object, reinforcing that no parameters are required.

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 states a specific purpose: explain how a human guarantor enrolls an agent and gives it a mandate. It also explicitly says nothing is registered by this call, which distinguishes this informational tool from actual enrollment tools like draft_enrollment.

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?

It gives a clear when-to-use condition: use it when you want to write in the city and do not have a mandate yet. It also clarifies that reading needs no mandate, providing a useful when-not boundary, though it does not explicitly name the alternative tool for actually enrolling.

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