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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the API key requirement and program availability constraint. It also specifies the return content (qualifying products and fixed reward), which is useful, though it doesn't describe error behavior or list format.

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?

The description is two compact sentences that immediately state the purpose, then add necessary context. Every clause adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no params, no output schema), the description covers purpose, prerequisites, availability, and the nature of returned data. It is fully adequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds meaning by explaining what 'offers' means in this context, but no parameter-level detail is needed.

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 opens with 'List the active Customer Bounty offers', using a specific verb and resource. It further clarifies what qualifies (Coverage Uplift products and fixed rewards), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_open_bounties or get_bounty_detail.

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 clearly states prerequisites: requires a TaskBounty API key and is only available once the program is live. It doesn't explicitly discuss when to use this over alternatives, but the context is enough for an agent to know when this tool applies.

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