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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior; the description adds the specific guarantee 'Does not save rows' and discloses that the payload is documentation naming other tools and parameters. That is meaningful context beyond the annotations, though it does not describe the guide's format or length.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with what the tool is and immediately followed by the call ordering. No filler; every sentence carries either purpose, sequencing, or a side-effect guarantee.

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 zero-parameter, read-only guide tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, ordering relative to plan_import, and the absence of writes. The only minor gap is that it does not hint at what the guide's contents look like beyond naming tools and parameters.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the baseline is 4. The description's mention that the guide names 'the real tools and parameters' is a useful pointer but does not need to document parameters that do not exist.

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 resource — spreadsheet import rules — and clarifies the return content: "The guide names the real tools and parameters." It is clearly distinct from data-mutating siblings like plan_import or import_order, though the opening phrase 'import rules' is slightly abstract until the third sentence explains it.

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?

It gives explicit sequencing ('Call this, then plan_import, before writing a CSV or Excel file'), names the concrete alternative (plan_import), and states the triggering condition (preparing a CSV/Excel import). An agent knows exactly when and in what order to call it.

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