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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds the 'act scope' requirement and notes that feedback improves future marketing drafts, providing behavioral context beyond the annotations. It does not contradict annotations and adds value by explaining the learning loop effect.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the action. It includes only essential information without fluff, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 skip action, the description covers the operation, cost, required scope, and feedback effect. It does not mention return value or reversibility (undo is implied via sibling), but this is not critical for basic invocation given the provided annotations and schema.

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 100%, with each parameter already described in detail (move_id, feedback_key enum, feedback_note maxLength). The description only restates the purpose of feedback_key/note, adding no extra semantic value beyond what the schema provides.

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 the verb 'Dismiss' and the resource 'growth move', with a clarifying parenthetical '(Skip in the Feed)'. This distinguishes it from siblings like archive_move and undo_move.

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?

Provides useful context such as 'Free' and 'requires the act scope', but does not explicitly mention when alternatives like archive_move or undo_move should be used. The sibling names make the distinction fairly clear, but no direct exclusions are given.

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