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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the default sort order ('most recent first') but says nothing about pagination, return shape, or rate limits, so it adds only modest behavioral context.

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 with no wasted words. The ordering behavior is front-loaded, followed immediately by the optional filter, making it easy to scan.

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 complete parameter documentation and annotations covering the safety profile, the description provides enough context to call it correctly. It lacks return-value or pagination detail, but no output schema exists and complexity is low.

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 100%, and both parameters are documented in the schema. The description's mention of site_id is redundant with the schema, and it says nothing extra about limit or filtering syntax. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List SEO audits') and adds ordering ('most recent first'). It does not explicitly differentiate from nearby siblings such as list_prospect_audits or get_audit, so it is clear but not sibling-aware.

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 tells the agent how to filter with site_id, which is useful usage context. However, it gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus list_prospect_audits, get_audit, or other audit-related siblings, leaving alternatives to inference.

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