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

Adds real information beyond annotations: the billing consequence ("it keeps being charged meanwhile") and the 409 precondition, plus the returned field sleepAt in lieu of an output schema. A small gap remains on whether repeated calls stack or reset the 5-minute window, which matters given idempotentHint=true.

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 short sentences: effect and cost first, then usage/alternative, then failure condition and return value. Zero filler; the most decision-relevant facts are front-loaded.

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 billed, side-effecting operation it covers the economic impact, the precondition, the sibling alternative, and the key return value. Only the repeat-call/max-extension semantics are unstated, which is minor given annotations and the single-parameter surface.

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 description never mentions the path/serverId argument, and reported schema coverage is 0% at the top level. The nested serverId property does carry a usable description ("the id field from listServers"), and with only one required parameter the navigation cost is low, so this lands at minimum-viable rather than failing.

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 effect ("Delays a running server's idle sleep by 5 minutes from now") with an exact mechanism and magnitude, and explicitly contrasts itself with startServer (wake) versus this tool (extend). An agent can tell it apart from every sibling without opening the 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 the positive condition ("while working on a server with no players online"), the exclusion (servers that are asleep — use startServer instead), and the precondition failure mode (409 if not running). When/when-not/alternative are all present.

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