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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful context beyond annotations: simulated credit cost and a full refund condition if FIX does not PASS.

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?

The description is two short sentences with no filler and front-loads the core action and required inputs. Every clause adds either purpose or cost behavior.

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 7-parameter creation tool with no output schema, the description is missing important context: what a Competitor Snapshot contains, what FIX means, and how status/retrieval works. It covers only required inputs and cost/refund behavior.

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 0% across 7 parameters. The description only clarifies business_name, city, and the n enum values; it leaves website, category, language, and competitors undocumented in both schema and description.

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 names a specific action ('Order') and resource ('Competitor Snapshot'), plus key inputs. It does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools such as get_sample_snapshot or get_snapshot_status, but the core purpose is clear.

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?

Usage is implied by the ordering context and the cost/refund note. However, it does not state when to use this instead of get_sample_snapshot or how it relates to get_snapshot_status, so alternatives remain unaddressed.

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