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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds operational context: the need for permission checks and restrictions for FREE businesses. This goes beyond annotations by detailing the access control behavior and prerequisites, though it does not describe return format or side effects.

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 a single paragraph but efficiently conveys purpose and usage guidelines in 4 sentences. It front-loads the core purpose and then provides step-by-step instructions. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for prerequisites) without losing conciseness.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and annotations, the description covers purpose, prerequisites, restrictions, and error handling. It lacks a description of the return value or summary content, but the context is sufficient for an agent to determine when to call this tool and how to prepare.

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 input schema has one parameter (communityId) with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain what communityId is or provide any additional meaning beyond the schema. For a single parameter, minimal guidance is acceptable, but the description should at least mention the ID's role.

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 'Get referral reward summary for a managed community' with a specific verb and resource. It clarifies that business and community are interchangeable, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_business_referral_reward_summary and get_my_referral_earnings.

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 provides explicit guidance: check business permissions, FREE businesses cannot use, call check_business_tool_access before inputs, show grace-period warning and resubscribe link, and never proceed when blocked. This tells the agent exactly when and how to use the tool, including prerequisites and conditions to avoid.

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