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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds 'Paid per call', a cost behavior not in annotations, and reinforces statelessness. It does not disclose rate limits, auth needs, or failure modes, but the annotation coverage lowers the required burden.

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?

Four short sentences each carry distinct value: statelessness, scope, local-context exclusion, and cost. The most important identity information is front-loaded in the first sentence. No filler or redundancy.

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 simple 2-parameter, stateless tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description covers the essentials: purpose, scope, statelessness, and cost. It omits the return format, but absence of an output schema makes that less critical. Slight gaps around input size limits or errors are minor given the tool's simplicity.

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%: text and max_tokens are already fully described. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies per the rubric.

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 a specific verb and resource: it summarizes provided text. The phrase 'ONLY the provided text' specifies scope, and the function is easily distinguished from siblings like paid_answer, paid_extract, and paid_translate. The purpose is unambiguous and immediately obvious.

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?

No explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus the many paid_* siblings. The 'No local context is used' statement implies it is not for context-dependent tasks, but it does not name alternatives or provide selection criteria. Cost is noted, but not as a usage guide.

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