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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral burden. It discloses that the probe is 'deterministic' and tied to a subscription, but does not state whether it mutates state, what permissions are required, how long it takes, or any rate/side-effect behavior.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is terse but not structurally padded, though that economy comes at the cost of omitted operational detail (scored under other dimensions).

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 no annotations, no output schema, and sibling tools that clearly split the domain, the description is incomplete. It omits when to use it, what the probe returns or affects, and how surface_id should be populated, leaving the agent to infer too much.

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 single parameter surface_id has 0% schema description coverage, so the description should compensate. It implies the value must be 'one of your verified surfaces' under a subscription, which adds some meaning, but gives no format, ID source, or constraints.

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 an action ('Full deterministic probe') and a target ('one of your verified surfaces'), but 'probe' and 'surface' are domain jargon left undefined, and it does not distinguish the operation from sibling tools defense_verdicts or exposure_verdict. An agent gets a rough category but not a precise purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus defense_verdicts or exposure_verdict. The '(subscription)' note hints at a precondition but does not establish when this probe is appropriate.

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