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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds useful access context ('Public; no farm PII'), but says nothing about return format, ordering, or pagination, so the added value beyond structured fields is modest.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and example, then adds scoping and routing details in compact clauses. Slightly busy with path fragments ('/supplier-portal', '/make-money-with-quail'), but no sentence is wasted.

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, zero-required-parameter list tool with no output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies purpose, access level, and sibling routing. It omits any sense of what a returned opportunity looks like, but nothing else an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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% and the single optional farmId is fully documented in the schema with its AI-key condition. The description adds no farmId syntax or behavior beyond echoing the public/no-PII nature, so the 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 ('List') and resource ('Active Supply Opportunities') and explains what those are ('what QuailOS/Undique is currently buying from member farms, e.g. quail wings Bulk-Supply'). It explicitly separates itself from the Rent-a-Hatch vendor page, so an agent can distinguish it from siblings like list_rentahatch_vendors 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 context on access ('Public; no farm PII') and an explicit boundary against a related sibling ('Separate from Rent-a-Hatch vendor page /make-money-with-quail'). It stops short of naming a positive 'use when X' trigger or distinguishing it from express_supplier_interest / list_my_supplier_shipments, so it is clear but not exhaustive.

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