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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context: it returns benchmarks aggregated from Hive's cross-merchant data and compares them to the merchant's own catalog stats.

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 sentences with no filler. The core purpose is stated first and the usage cue is front-loaded immediately after, making it easy for an agent to scan and act.

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 read-only tool with one optional parameter, the description plus schema fully cover what the tool doesaine and when to invoke it. The absence of an output schema is acceptable because the description names the expected comparison content.

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 schema covers the single optional 'category' parameter completely, including valid values and the default behavior when omitted. The description adds no extra parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 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 names a specific verb ('Fetch') and a distinct resource ('Hive cross-merchant signal... category benchmarks... alongside merchant's own catalog stats'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_account_summary or get_deep_audit. The comparison purpose is explicit.

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 provides an explicit trigger condition: 'Use when the user asks

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