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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral content by stating what is returned (brands with sales, highest discount, example product), but says nothing about scope limits, rate limits, or data freshness.

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?

A single, tightly packed sentence with the core result set front-loaded ('welke supplementmerken nú een sale hebben'). No filler, though it compresses return details into one clause.

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 partially compensates by describing the returned fields (brands, highest discount, example product). However, the undocumented 'merk' parameter and the absence of any alternative-tool routing leave the definition only marginally complete for a discovery tool with overlapping siblings.

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 only 50%: the 'markt' enum is already documented in the schema, while the 'merk' parameter has no description anywhere. The description references the chosen market but adds no meaning beyond the schema and leaves 'merk' entirely unexplained.

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 verb+resource: it returns which supplement brands currently have a sale in a chosen market, including the highest discount and an example product. It is clearly distinguishable in substance, but it does not name or differentiate itself from close siblings like week_deals, verwachte_sales, or beste_in_categorie.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no sibling alternative is referenced even though week_deals and verwachte_sales overlap in the sales/deals space. Usage is only implied by the mention of 'de gekozen markt'.

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