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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds useful behavioral context by noting the output includes 'canonical article links and safety notes,' which is beyond what annotations provide.

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 a single, compact sentence that states the purpose and the optional filter. Every word earns its place, and it is front-loaded with the core function.

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?

The tool has a simple schema with one optional parameter, annotations covering safety, and no output schema. The description explains what is returned (links and safety notes) and the optional filter, which is sufficient for an agent to call it correctly. It does not mention how results are ordered or paginated, but these are minor gaps for such a simple list tool.

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 only parameter, category, is clearly described with examples of valid values. The description's mention of filtering by category reinforces the schema without adding much new information, but the coverage is complete.

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: list documented Aperture Wallet features, with canonical article links and safety notes. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like search or fetch, but the mention of 'canonical article links and safety notes' gives some differentiation.

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 an optional filter by category, which offers some usage context. However, it does not state when to use this tool versus alternatives like search or fetch, nor does it mention any exclusions or alternatives.

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