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

Annotations already mark read-only and non-destructive. The description adds context by requiring a business permission check, warning about FREE business restrictions, and instructing to show grace-period warnings and resubscribe links before proceeding. It does not contradict annotations.

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 of five sentences. Each sentence contributes either the core purpose or essential access-control steps, with no filler. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

The description accounts for the tool's access-control complexity, including permission checks, FREE business exclusions, and blocked-access behavior. It does not describe the return payload, but the plural sibling list_magic_reach_buckets and the tool's name imply what a bucket is. Given the absence of an output schema, the description covers the most critical operational context.

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 description gives no parameter-specific meaning, while the schema only documents bucketName (25% coverage). filters and searchString are completely unexplained, so the description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage. The bucketName field's schema description provides the only useful guidance, which the tool description does not echo.

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 the exact resource and action: 'Get one Magic Reach recipient bucket for a managed community.' This clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_magic_reach_buckets by emphasizing singular retrieval.

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 provides explicit preconditions: check business permissions, call check_business_tool_access before collecting inputs, and never proceed when access is blocked. It also names the specific restriction that FREE businesses cannot use the tool, giving clear when-not-to-use guidance.

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