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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds the ordering dependency and position in the query workflow, which is behavioral context beyond annotations. It does not contradict and provides useful operational details.

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 sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: definition, prerequisites, and usage triggers. Slightly verbose with the trigger phrase list but still efficient and well-structured.

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 output schema present and annotations covering safety, description addresses prerequisites, timing, and combination with other tools. It is sufficiently complete for a zero-parameter loader tool, though it doesn't describe the workflow contents in detail.

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?

Tool has zero parameters, so the schema fully covers semantics. Baseline 4 applies; description need not explain inputs. No additional parameter information required.

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?

Description clearly states it 'Load comparison workflow' for 'X vs Y, peer analysis, relative valuation', naming the specific resource and purpose. It distinguishes from sibling workflow tools by focusing on comparison, with explicit trigger phrases.

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?

Explicit prerequisites: 'REQUIRES get_database_schema then get_query_patterns to be called first (in that order)' and timing: 'Call BEFORE writing SQL'. Also states combinability with other workflow tools, covering both when and how to use.

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