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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read, and the description reinforces this with 'Shows.' It adds valuable context beyond annotations by disclosing the auth requirement ('Only for business owners signed in to Awning') and clarifying it covers both draft and existing business states, plus submission blockers.

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?

Two short sentences deliver the audience restriction and the core behavior without any filler. Every phrase earns its place, and the most important scoping information 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 low-complexity, read-only tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, this description is complete: it identifies the intended caller, the object being previewed, the two possible states, and the kind of information returned (client view and submission blockers).

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%, and the single optional parameter is already well documented with 'Only needed if you manage several businesses.' The tool description does not add further parameter-level meaning, so the schema carries the semantic weight and the baseline score applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Shows how clients will see the business' and adds precise scope ('draft or existing') and an extra distinguishing behavior ('what blocks submission'). This makes it clear this is a client-facing preview tool, not a status or edit tool.

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 a clear contextual boundary: 'Only for business owners signed in to Awning.' It implies when the tool is useful—when an owner needs to preview the client view or understand submission blockers—but it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or say when not to use it.

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