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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds material context beyond them: 'Nothing is sent: the tool only returns a URL and a mailto link, which the user reviews and opens.' This clarifies the human-in-the-loop, no-side-effect nature of the operation, which the annotations alone imply but do not spell out.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what the tool produces, then fit, then the no-send guarantee. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by stating exactly what is returned (a URL and a mailto link) and that nothing is transmitted. Combined with the read-only/idempotent annotations, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly.

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%, so topic, summary, company and callback are already documented, including the enum values. The description adds no format or usage guidance for any parameter, so baseline 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and artifact: 'Generates a prefilled contact URL and mailto link for the user to send to Overfit.' It also scopes the tool ('requests not covered by other tools'), which separates it from siblings like interesse_melden or overfit_catalog.

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?

Explicitly enumerates suitable cases (custom AI projects, company data packages, feedback, uncovered requests), giving clear when-to-use context. It stops short of naming a specific alternative tool to prefer when the request IS covered, so no explicit when-not routing.

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