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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, indicating the tool may modify state, yet the description says 'Calling this changes nothing' and that it only returns a preview and confirmation link. That is a direct contradiction of the annotation's safety/read-only signal.

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 purpose sentence is vague, and the second sentence about money being integer minor units is entirely irrelevant to this tool. The important preview/confirmation behavior is useful but not front-loaded, so the description wastes space on misleading content.

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 simple two-boolean privacy-preview tool with no output schema, the description usefully explains that the call returns a preview and confirmation link rather than applying changes. It omits explicit naming of the privacy concepts, but the schema covers those parameters.

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 cookieBanner and marketingOptIn are already fully documented. The description adds no valid parameter semantics and instead includes an irrelevant money-in-cents sentence that does not map to any parameter and may confuse the agent.

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 says it sets 'what the shop asks its shoppers,' which implies consent/privacy settings but never explicitly names privacy, cookies, or marketing. It does not distinguish this tool from the many sibling settings_* tools, leaving the agent to infer the purpose from the tool name and schema.

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 the key usage caveat: calling the tool changes nothing, returns a preview and confirmation link, and only the merchant can complete the change. It does not name alternative tools, but the workflow context is explicit.

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