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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive; description adds value by stating it's a 'free read', 'descriptive observed data only', and lists returned fields (dominant regime, confidence, distribution, signals). No contradiction.

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?

Description is reasonably concise with clear sentences, though it could be more front-loaded. It includes purpose, contrast, returns, disclaimer, and workflow without excessive verbosity.

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 read-only tool with output schema, the description adequately describes returns and workflow context. Covers all key aspects needed for an agent to decide to use it and interpret results.

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 coverage is 0% but description provides no information about the three parameters (limit, caller_id, window_hours) or how they affect the output. Parameters have defaults but meaning is entirely implied.

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?

Description clearly states it retrieves a market-wide regime from a persisted feed, and explicitly contrasts with `detect_regime` for live per-asset regime, establishing unique purpose.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (market-wide posture check) and when not (use `detect_regime` for per-asset), and provides workflow guidance for pairing with `detect_regime`.

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