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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint: true, and the description does not contradict that. It adds behavioral context about the link selection (public vs private preview) and the statuses included, but doesn't describe pagination or other side effects. Since read-only is already covered, this is adequate.

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 three sentences, with scope stated first, then output details, then filtering. No redundant words, and the most important scoping constraint is 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 listing tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key aspects: what is returned, filtering, and link behavior. It doesn't differentiate from search_businesses, which could be a minor gap, but overall it's sufficient for an agent to call it correctly.

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 must explain parameters. It explicitly says 'Filter by status or by part of the name', which maps to the query and status parameters. It explains their purpose clearly, though it doesn't detail enum values, which are in the schema.

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 states it lists every business on Awning with status, owner, and link, and explicitly scopes it to the Awning team. This distinguishes it from get_business (singular) and search_businesses (likely filtered search), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies it's for listing all businesses with optional filters, but does not explicitly compare to sibling tools like search_businesses or get_business. It gives clear context on filtering but no exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance, so it's slightly below explicit.

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