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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It conveys the content domain and that filtering is optional, but does not disclose read-only status, return format, pagination behavior, or how the limit parameter affects results.

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 that starts with the resource and then lists topics. It is efficient and wastes little space, though the topic list is somewhat dense.

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 simple two-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the resource content and one parameter. It remains incomplete on usage context, return behavior, and the limit parameter, but provides enough to make a basic call.

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%, so the description should compensate. It adds meaning for the query parameter by calling it an optional text filter, but says nothing about limit; however, limit is a standard constrained integer whose schema default/min/max make its purpose inferable.

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 the specific resource (smm.guide articles) and enumerates the topics covered, which clearly distinguishes it from sibling panel/service tools. It does not explicitly state the verb 'list' or 'find' in the description, relying on the name and title for that, but the purpose is still 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?

The description does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it name any siblings such as search_panels or list_services. It only mentions an optional text filter, leaving usage context implicit.

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