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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful output contents (slug, URL parameters, supported languages/currencies) but does not mention pagination, ordering, or limitations; those are not necessary given the annotations and output schema, so a mid score is appropriate.

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 and an inline example, with the core action front-loaded and no filler. Every sentence contributes either a resource definition, a sequencing cue, or a clarifying example.

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?

With an output schema, full schema coverage for the only parameter, and annotations covering read-only/idempotent behavior, the description provides everything an agent needs to decide and invoke the tool correctly. Nothing important 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?

The schema already documents the single parameter fully with enum values and a description, so coverage is 100%. The description's example reinforces the group=history behavior but adds little beyond the schema, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'List every SmartMoney77 calculator' with its slug, URL parameters, and languages/currencies. It also distinguishes itself from build_calculator_link by stating it should be called first, and the example clarifies what the group filter does.

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 explicitly instructs 'Call this before build_calculator_link', which is clear sequencing context. It does not enumerate when not to use other sibling tools, but the primary alternative is named and the filter behavior is demonstrated with an example.

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