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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds cursor-pagination behavior and notes that charge data is external registry data (not instructions), which is valuable context beyond annotations. 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?

Three sentences, no unnecessary words. Front-loaded with the core purpose, then proceeds to usage guidance and pagination details. Highly efficient.

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?

With no output schema, the description explains pagination and data treatment sufficiently for a read-only, idempotent tool. It lacks details on error responses or rate limits, but for a simple get operation, it is reasonably complete.

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%, so the schema already documents all parameters well. The description adds context about pagination (hasMore, nextCursor) that relates to the cursor and limit parameters, but does not significantly enhance parameter meaning 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 tool gets charges (mortgages and secured borrowings) for a company, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_company by mentioning the need to check supportedSections.charges after get_company, implying it's a section-specific tool.

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 explicit precondition: use after get_company and check supportedSections.charges before calling. Also explains cursor pagination usage. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but the precondition effectively guides appropriate usage.

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