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

Annotations already declare the safe read-only, idempotent profile. The description adds genuinely new behavior: newest-first ordering, the permission requirement ('Any key role'), and an alert surfacing trigger events left open over an hour — none of which the annotations provide.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the resource and scope, with filters and the alert caveat trailing. Efficient, though the trailing alert clause is slightly elliptical and could be tighter.

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 output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining the return shape. It hints at an accompanying alert but not at pagination, result volume, or how the alert is attached, leaving some gaps for a listing tool.

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 description coverage is only 33% (household_id has no description), so the description must compensate, and it does by clarifying that both household_id and status act as optional filters. It still adds nothing about the api_key parameter beyond what the schema already states.

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?

States the resource (mandates) and scope (the organization's) plus ordering (newest first) and filters, which cleanly separates it from the sibling get_mandate. It never says the verb 'list' explicitly, but 'The organization's mandates, newest first' makes the listing behavior 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?

'optionally for one household or status' implies how to narrow results, and 'Any key role' signals the auth context. However, it never states when to use this versus get_mandate for a single mandate, nor any explicit exclusions, so usage is only implied.

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