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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavior beyond that: the returned fields (id, title, createdAt), newest-first ordering, and the cursor/hasNextPage pagination contract — meaningful since no output schema exists.

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 tightly packed sentences with zero filler — purpose, then return shape and ordering, then pagination mechanics. Front-loaded with the core purpose before the procedural detail.

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, so the description must convey the return shape, and it does (id, title, createdAt, newest-first, cursor/hasNextPage). Combined with full schema coverage and read-only annotations, an agent has everything needed to invoke and iterate pages 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 coverage is 100%, so all five parameters are already documented. The description's cursor explanation ("a jam id from a prior endCursor") nearly restates the schema text and it adds nothing about limit, intent, or llm_model; the mention of hasNextPage is a return field, not a parameter. 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 opens with a specific verb+resource ("List the Jams recorded through a recording link") and states the addressing key (publicId). That scope phrase distinguishes it from listJams (all Jams) and getRecordingLink (the link itself) without the reader needing to open any schema.

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 clearly says how to page: pass cursor from a prior endCursor and check hasNextPage. It doesn't explicitly say when to prefer this over listJams or when to call getRecordingLink first, so there is no exclusion/alternative routing, but the calling context is clear.

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