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 that results contain 'real statuses and client-ready links', hinting at return content, plus the Zambo Pass auth requirement, but says nothing about pagination behavior or what the cursor does.

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?

Two short sentences with no padding, and the core purpose is front-loaded. It is arguably over-terse for a tool with a cursor-based pagination parameter, but nothing is 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the read-only annotations carry the safety story. Still, for a five-parameter tool with a pagination cursor, the description omits any hint about how listing is scoped or paged, leaving a modest gap.

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 80%, so the schema already documents cursor, _zambo_key, _caller_label, and _continuity_ai_label. The description's mention of _session_id reuse only echoes what the schema description already states, adding no new semantic detail. Baseline 3 is correct.

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 (List) and resource (Zambo Handovers), so the basic operation is unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tools 'handover' and 'handover_status', leaving the agent to infer the division of labor between creating, listing, and checking status.

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?

'using Zambo Pass and the same _session_id' supplies a real prerequisite (reuse the session id across calls), which is more than most definitions offer. But there is no explicit when-to-use versus 'handover_status' or 'handover', and no stated exclusions or conditions.

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