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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint), the description adds valuable behavioral context: 'Returns metadata only - no persona text and no skill instructions,' 'it never raises a protocol error — it returns an error object,' and 'Every call is read-only and idempotent, so after correcting the input it is always safe to retry.' This significantly enhances transparency.

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 well-structured with a clear lead sentence, followed by input/output details, usage guidance, and error handling. While slightly verbose, every sentence adds value and the information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (no parameters, output schema exists), the description covers all relevant aspects: purpose, input, output structure, return behavior, error handling, and usage guidelines. It is complete and leaves no ambiguity.

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, and the description confirms this with 'Takes no arguments.' Schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds no further parameter details but is clear and accurate.

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 explicitly states 'List every product in the Personal Suite line with its included skills.' It also distinguishes from siblings by noting that it returns metadata only, not skill instructions, and that the returned slug values are used with other tools like get_free_skill, get_full_product, and get_full_skill.

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?

The description clearly specifies when to use the tool ('when the caller wants to see what this server covers') and when not to ('Not for keyword search across the whole 138-product catalog... not for instructions the caller can act on'). It also provides an alternative: 'search_catalog' from the catalog server.

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