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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent and non-destructive, but the description adds substantive detail beyond them: the 30-day window, sort order (busiest first), the filtering rule that uncalled routes are absent, the returned fields, and the Owner/Admin auth requirement.

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 well-structured sentence using a colon to enumerate the return fields, front-loaded with what the tool answers. Dense but every clause carries information; only slightly long.

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 burden of explaining the return shape, and it does — route, method, call count, last call, ordering. Auth needs and the absence-of-data rule are also covered, leaving nothing an agent needs to call it 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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no filtering inputs are needed and frames the scope as fixed, adding what meaning there is to convey.

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 — the organization's management key activity — with an explicit 30-day scope. An agent can immediately distinguish this from get_organization, get_usage, or get_credit_balance without inspecting 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?

Gives clear context: it mirrors Settings › Management key › Recent activity and requires Owner or Admin. This tells the agent who can call it and what it corresponds to in the UI, though it names no alternative tool for related questions (e.g., general API usage).

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