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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds return composition (latest quotes/jobs/invoices with their statuses) and an auth requirement ('Cotlet API key with access to this app'), which is genuine extra context, though no rate limits or pagination behavior are disclosed.

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?

Front-loaded and short, with the resource and return contents stated up front. The first sentence and the 'Returns one client with...' sentence partially restate the same content, a minor redundancy.

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 return-value burden and does so: it enumerates what comes back and notes statuses. Auth is covered; only pagination/limits and explicit sibling routing are missing for a simple single-parameter read.

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?

Only one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema already stating 'Client ID from list_clients'. The prose adds no format, source-lookup or edge-case detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 for schema-driven parameters 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+resource ('One client') plus the payload it returns (properties, recent quotes, jobs, invoices). The singular 'one client' implicitly separates it from jobber_list_clients, but no sibling is named explicitly, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

'Use it to see a client's history before writing to them' gives a clear intent and a moment to reach for it. It doesn't name jobber_list_clients as the alternative for browsing multiple clients, so the routing is implied rather than explicit.

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