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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read; the description adds 'newest-first' ordering, which is genuinely new behavioral context. 'Cursor-paginated' largely restates the cursor/next_cursor schema, and nothing is said about default volume, clamping, or rate limits.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded and waste-free. The first line restates the tool name, which is mildly redundant but harmless at this length.

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 an 8-filter paginated feed with no output schema and minimal annotations, the description omits what the anomalies are, what filters exist, and what a record looks like. It is too thin to fully orient an agent, even though the schema covers the parameters.

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 100% across all 8 parameters, including enum values and the limit clamp, so the schema carries the semantic load. The description adds no parameter-level detail, which is the expected baseline when the schema is complete.

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?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (anomalies), and the second sentence clarifies the feed's ordering. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_anomaly (singular) or the many other list_* tools, so an agent must infer the distinction.

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 guidance on when to use this versus get_anomaly or other list tools, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent gets the 'what' but not the 'when.'

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