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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds valuable non-annotation context: SuperAdmin-only authorization, the presence of sensitive email data, and a logging constraint ('argument names only in mcp_logs'). It stops short of describing return format or pagination behavior.

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?

Three short sentences front-load the purpose before auth and data-sensitivity notes. Every sentence earns its place, though the final sentence about argument names in mcp_logs is slightly cryptic and could be clearer.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering safety, the description sufficiently covers purpose, authorization, data sensitivity, and logging. It omits pagination and return-structure details, but no output schema exists and the parameters are fully documented.

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%, so the schema already documents all five parameters including filters, limit, cursor, and the farmId requirement. The description adds no parameter-level syntax or constraints beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('List rent_a_hatch_waitlist customer prospects') and explicitly excludes vendor applications, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_rentahatch_vendors. An agent can identify the exact dataset without opening the schema.

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?

Provides a clear when-not condition ('NOT vendor applications') and a prerequisite ('SuperAdmin only'). It does not name the alternative tool (e.g., list_rentahatch_vendors) or describe when to use this versus other list tools, but the context is explicit enough for correct selection.

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