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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: it specifies the returned fields and the noteworthy behavior that including a country code still returns the worldwide row.

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 short sentences deliver the core purpose and the parameter behavior with no filler. The most important information, what the tool returns, is front-loaded.

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 low parameter count, simple schema, and annotations covering safety/idempotency, the description is complete for a read-only lookup. With no output schema, it appropriately states what the caller will receive and how filtering behaves.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description augments the country parameter by explaining that it narrows results while retaining the worldwide row, which is not evident from the schema alone. The org parameter is already well described by its enum and label.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it retrieves broadcast rights for a promotion, and names exactly what is returned (provider, kind, link). It clearly differentiates itself from the unrelated sibling tools and the title matches the description.

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?

The description explains the primary use case and gives concrete guidance on how to narrow results via the country parameter. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but no sibling tool overlaps with broadcast rights, so this is sufficient.

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