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

Annotations already convey readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the list omits documents, returns summary fields, and defaults to active households while the underlying API returns every status. This goes beyond the structured annotations without contradicting them.

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 tightly packed sentences carry all essential information: resource, fields returned, sibling distinction, and status semantics. Every clause earns its place and the key distinction 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?

For a simple read-only list tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is complete: it states the returned fields, the default filter, how to override it, and when to use the sibling tool instead. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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 parameters are already documented. The description adds the crucial default behavior of the status parameter ('Defaults to active households') and explains how to achieve an all-status listing, enriching the schema's enum with operational meaning.

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 ('List') and resource ('the organization's stored households') and enumerates the returned fields. It also explicitly differentiates itself from get_household, which returns one household in full, making the tool's scope unambiguous.

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 provides clear when-to-use guidance: use this for summary listings without documents, and use get_household for a full household. It also explains the status default and how to request all statuses, so the agent knows exactly how to navigate the status parameter.

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