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

The description discloses that it creates a workspace (write operation) and returns an API key, along with how to set the Authorization header. Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false) are consistent, and the description adds useful behavioral context beyond them.

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 sentences, no wasted words, critical information front-loaded. Efficient and to the point.

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?

The description explains the step's role, inputs, output (API key), and subsequent action (setting Authorization header). For a verification step with an output schema, this is 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 provides 100% coverage with descriptions. The description adds cross-tool context: requestId 'From register_organisation_request' and code '6-digit code from the verification email', enhancing understanding 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?

The description clearly states 'Step 2 of agentic signup', specifies the action 'confirms the 6-digit code and creates the workspace', and explicitly mentions returning an API key. This distinguishes it from sibling tools, especially register_organisation_request.

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?

The description indicates it is step 2 following register_organisation_request, providing clear sequencing. It does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives, but the context is sufficient for this specialized tool.

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