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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds important context beyond that: it requires an API key as a Bearer token and notes each listing has its own key, plus it specifies the return content (review/visibility state, votes, rank).

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 short and front-loads the return content, but the first sentence is a fragment and its phrasing is slightly awkward. Overall it is efficient with no wasted words.

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?

The description covers authentication and return values, which is helpful for a no-parameter, read-only tool. However, it leaves the singular/plural ambiguity unresolved—does it return one listing or many servers?—which is a key gap given the tool name.

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 does not need to explain any parameter semantics.

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 what information is returned (review/visibility state, votes, rank) but lacks a clear verb and is ambiguous about whether it returns a single listing or multiple servers. The tool name 'list_my_servers' suggests plural, while the description says 'the listing', creating confusion.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_server, search_servers, or top_servers. It only mentions an authentication prerequisite, not situational context.

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