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

Adds useful behavioral context beyond the annotations: payment-derived identity, resolution timing requirement, rejection of unpaid/anonymous submissions, and the source of files and order_token. Annotations are limited to generic hints, so this extra context is valuable.

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?

Four sentences with information front-loaded: purpose first, then prerequisites, constraints, and alternative tool. Each sentence adds necessary context, though slightly longer than ideal.

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?

Covers the main flow, prerequisites, and alternatives, but the schema indicates zero required parameters while the description implies all listed fields (order_token, project fields, files) are expected, creating ambiguity about which are truly mandatory. Also misses clarification of name/email/company/package.

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?

The description explains order_token (from get_order), files (from create_upload_url), and resolution (must be selected), and groups project fields, but omits name, email, company, and package. With only 14% schema description coverage, this partial guidance is helpful but incomplete.

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 'Submit the creative brief for a PAID order', identifying a specific verb and resource, and explicitly distinguishes itself from submit_custom_inquiry with 'use the submit_custom_inquiry tool instead'.

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 when-to-use context: 'pass order_token (from get_order; session ids are not accepted here)' and states the exclusion 'unpaid/anonymous submissions are rejected here', with a direct alternative 'for Custom Production inquiries without payment use the submit_custom_inquiry tool instead'.

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