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

With readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false already covering the safety profile, the description adds real context: the open-jobs default, newest-first ordering, the fields the search matches, and an auth requirement (Cotlet API key with access to this app). That auth note is valuable and not in the annotations.

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-loads the resource, but the first two sentences are near-duplicates — 'Contract jobs with client, contract status, revenue, cost and profitability' and 'Returns contract jobs with client, status, revenue, cost and profit' say the same thing twice, wasting space.

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 read-only, three-param list tool whose schema is fully documented and whose safety profile is covered by annotations, the description supplies the missing pieces: default filter behavior, ordering, search scope, chaining hint, and auth requirement. Return values are stated, though no output schema exists.

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 limit, search, and status are already fully documented including the status enum. The description largely repeats the search scope already in the schema and only adds the default-ordering behavior, so the 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 resource plus the returned fields (client, contract status, revenue, cost, profitability), so the agent knows this is the Knowify contract-job list. It doesn't name a sibling like knowify_get_job to differentiate a list from a single fetch, so it stops 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?

Provides useful default behavior ('without a status filter it returns all open jobs, newest first') and a chaining hint ('use job_id from each item in the other tools'). However it never states when to use this versus knowify_get_job or knowify_get_job_cost, so usage is mostly implied.

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