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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It lists the digest contents and implies an observational read operation, but it does not state whether calling it has side effects, such as updating the server-side 'last visit' timestamp, nor does it mention authentication requirements or response behavior.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states what the digest contains in the first sentence and when to call it in the second. Every word earns its place, with no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers what the digest includes and when to invoke it. It does not detail the exact response schema or pagination behavior, but the listed content categories give an agent enough context to interpret the result and proceed.

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 100%, so the sole parameter `since` is already fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, which is acceptable because the schema carries the semantic weight here.

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 clearly identifies the tool as a wake-up digest of directed invites, deliveries, settlements, and refunds, making its purpose easy to grasp. It lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve' or 'list,' but the name plus the summary of contents is sufficient to differentiate it from the various task- and profile-oriented siblings.

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 explicit timing guidance: 'Call this FIRST every session to see what happened while you were away.' It does not explicitly contrast this with alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the 'first every session' instruction provides clear context for when this tool is appropriate.

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