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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (destructive, non-idempotent, open-world), and the description adds substantial context: it saves placeholder assets, triggers checklist generation that may research public sources and send a completion email, refuses an already-onboarded estate, and warns that partial failures are not safe to retry. This is behavior beyond what the annotations convey.

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 action, then preconditions, side effects, and the retry caveat in dense, waste-free sentences. No filler.

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 destructive, multi-step onboarding mutation with no output schema, the description covers trigger conditions, side effects, refusal behavior, and the retry hazard. Nothing an agent needs to call 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 description coverage is 100% with all 7 params documented, so the schema carries parameter meaning. The description only advises collecting fields conversationally, adding little parameter-level detail. 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 and resource: 'Set up a new estate for the signed-in user and generate their personalized probate checklist.' It is clearly distinguished from siblings by contrasting with list_my_estates as the trigger, so an agent can tell when this onboarding flow applies versus a plain estate query.

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?

Explicitly names the condition: 'Use this when list_my_estates returns no estates (or one with no deceased details yet), or the user is just getting started.' It names the sibling that gates it and adds the operational instruction to collect fields conversationally before a single call.

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