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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no pagination behavior, no result volume expectations, no note about how site_id affects targeting. With annotations carrying the burden, no added context earns only a low score.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the core action front-loaded and no filler. It is well-sized, though the terseness leaves no room for the routing and pagination context that would help.

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 4-param, zero-required list tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the minimum is met. Missing pieces are moderate: no indication that results are paginated across pages, no output/return shape, and no guidance on when to prefer it over woo_get_coupon.

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%: page, search, site_id and per_page are all documented in the schema with defaults and bounds. The description's generic 'optional filters' adds no syntax or semantics beyond what the schema already provides, 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+resource ('List WooCommerce coupons') that is clearly distinguishable from write siblings like woo_create_coupon and woo_update_coupon. However, it never contrasts itself with woo_get_coupon (single coupon retrieval), so sibling differentiation is only implicit.

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?

'with optional filters' hints at scope but gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and never names alternatives such as woo_get_coupon for a single coupon or woo_create_coupon/woo_update_coupon for writes. The agent must infer routing from the name alone.

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