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

Annotations cover destructiveHint; description adds substantial beyond that — rejects invalid drafts with draftValidation errors, deletes the pending draft version, does not wait for refresh job, discloses computeStatus semantics (REFRESHING async vs TO_REFRESH on queue failure), bqName immutability, and Clerk MCP only restriction. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Dense but front-loaded and organized: action → prerequisite → error semantics → return fields → follow-up. Some long run-on clauses about computeStatus and bqName could be tightened, but every sentence carries operational value.

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?

Complete for a mutation tool that both deletes a draft and triggers async work. Covers prerequisites, error path, async polling, immutable identifier for downstream query, and environment restriction (Clerk MCP only). No output schema exists, and the description appropriately describes return fields.

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%, so baseline 3. Description adds meaning: virtualDimensionId equals id from list/get/search, and success returns bqName used for query groupBy/filterCel, with example showing virtualDimensionId sourced from create/list.

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?

States a specific multi-step action: validate persisted draft, promote to published, kick off BigQuery refresh. Distinguishes from siblings by naming update_virtual_dimension_draft, create_virtual_dimension_draft, and preview_virtual_dimension_draft as prerequisites/alternatives.

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?

Explicit when-to-use: requires a pending draft row; tells agent to call update/create draft first, and that preview alone does not create a draft. Also gives post-publish polling guidance (poll get/list until COMPLETED) and retry guidance on TO_REFRESH.

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