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

Discloses that every note is stored as pending and editor-reviewed before publication, which is crucial behavioral context beyond the annotations. The annotations only say readOnlyHint=false, but this description clarifies the asynchronous approval workflow.

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 sentences with no fluff; the purpose and key constraint (token, pending state) are front-loaded. Slightly verbose with 'Rattlesnakes By Mail' repetition, but still efficient.

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?

Complete for a submission tool with full schema coverage and no output schema needed. It explains the validation context (editor review) and the token requirement, which are the key non-obvious aspects.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage of parameter descriptions, including enum values and formats. The description does not add new meaning beyond what the schema offers, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (submit) and resource (note about claim/entity/question), and explicitly distinguishes from siblings by naming the context (Rattlesnakes By Mail). The purpose is unmistakable and does not overlap with the other tools.

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?

Clearly states when to use (to submit a correction or note) and the prerequisite (client token issued out of band). It effectively signals that this is for user-generated content submission, not for querying or listing like siblings.

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