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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context such as pagination behavior, ordering, or default result scope. It is purely a statement of action with no additional disclosure beyond what annotations provide.

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?

The description is a single sentence that is direct and front-loaded with the main action and resource. There is no extraneous information, making it highly concise and 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?

Given the presence of a complete output schema and thorough annotations, the description suffices for a straightforward list operation. It does not need to explain return values due to the output schema, and the optional filters are self-evident. Minor gaps exist around result ordering or default behavior, but these are not critical.

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 all three parameters (type, limit, status) are already documented. The description adds no further detail beyond the schema, meeting the baseline for a well-described 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 the tool lists offer rules, which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_offer_rule (single rule) and create_offer_rule (creation). The mention of optional filters adds further specificity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_offer_rule or when to use filters. It simply says 'with optional filters' without any context or exclusions. This leaves the agent without direction on selecting this tool.

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