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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the shape of the response (asset plus observation data kinds plus last-seen) and implicitly frames the tool as a read-only list, but it says nothing about pagination, whether results are capped, or what account/permission context is required for a mutation-free listing.

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?

Two tight sentences with no waste. The purpose is stated first and the navigational hint follows immediately.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description usefully summarizes the return payload. For a listing tool with three simple params it is nearly complete, with the main gap being pagination/limit behavior and whether the listed set is exhaustive.

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 only 67%, with the limit parameter having no description beyond default/min/max, yet the description never mentions q, type, or limit. It does not explain whether limit truncates the list, whether a total is returned, or how type filtering interacts with the listed results, so it adds no meaning beyond the schema.

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 verb (List) and resource (assets this account is watching), and goes further by naming the return contents: observation data kinds and last-seen timestamps. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools plane_asset and plane_events, so an agent can choose correctly without opening a schema.

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?

Explicitly prescribes an ordering ('Use this first to learn what the account has') and names the alternatives for detail ('then plane_events or plane_asset'). That is direct routing guidance rather than inferred usage.

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