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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that only matured reveals are returned and that Merkle paths are part of the payload, which is useful. It does not state read-only nature, sorting, default limits, or what 'matured' means, but this is acceptable for a simple list operation.

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 extremely compact with no filler. Each sentence earns its place: the first states the core resource and content, the second gives the optional filter parameters. Information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values do not need to be described. For a two-parameter list tool, the core behavior and optional filters are present, but missing default-limit behavior, pagination expectations, and sibling differentiation leave some contextual gaps.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does provide the month format YYYY-MM and marks both parameters optional. However, it does not define limit semantics, default values, or any constraints, leaving partial ambiguity for an agent.

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 resource (signal reveals), a state (matured), and included content (Merkle paths). Combined with the tool name's 'list' verb, an agent can infer this returns a collection of matured reveals. It is not as explicit as 'List all...' and does not contrast siblings, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not point to verify_reveal for individual reveal verification or to latest_signals for unmatured signals, leaving alternatives unmentioned. The 'matured' qualifier only implies a filter rather than explaining selection criteria.

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