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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses useful context: the data covers a ~90-day window and includes days left, official exit steps, and sources. However, it does not describe ordering, freshness, pagination, or whether results are cached or live.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The long parenthetical list of examples is dense but useful for identifying coverage; a slightly shorter list might read better, but nothing is truly wasted.

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 zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description gives enough context: the time window, the entity categories covered, and the kinds of fields returned (days left, exit steps, sources). It falls short only in not explicitly situating itself against siblings.

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 parameter semantics are not applicable. The description appropriately does not invent parameter details. Baseline 4 is correct for a no-parameter tool.

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 resource and scope: crypto shutdown deadlines in the next ~90 days, with categories and examples. It does not include an explicit action verb or directly name sibling tools, but the category list implicitly distinguishes it from a narrow exchange-delisting tool.

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?

The description gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus exit_quote or list_exchange_delistings. The 90-day window implies a time-bound use case, but there is no statement of alternatives or exclusions.

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