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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered; the description adds real value by disclosing the payload shape (status values draft/open/closed, counts of questions and answers, link, code) in the absence of an output schema. It stops short of covering ordering, pagination, or whether archived/closed surveys are included by default.

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 compact sentence with the scope front-loaded and every element (status, counts, link, code) earning its place. It is a noun phrase rather than a verb-led statement, but nothing is padded.

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 zero-parameter read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers what the agent needs: which surveys (all of the teacher's) and what each entry contains. Minor gaps remain around ordering and result size, which matter little here.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; the description does not need to add parameter detail.

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 clear resource (all surveys of the teacher) and enumerates the returned fields (status, question/answer counts, link, code), so an agent knows this is a full listing rather than a single fetch. It does not explicitly contrast with the sibling get_survey, leaving that distinction to be inferred from 'Alle'.

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?

Usage is only implied: 'Alle Umfragen der Lehrkraft' suggests a listing/overview use case, but there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over get_survey or get_survey_results, nor any prerequisite or exclusion. The agent must infer the routing from the word 'Alle'.

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