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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral detail by enumerating possible return statuses and the 'when available' price condition, as well as the Sedo-only data source. This goes beyond what the annotations state.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by return behavior and scope limitation. Each sentence contributes useful information, and the related-tool reference is brief and relevant.

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 tool's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers all necessary context: purpose, return values, data source exclusivity, and related tools. No critical behavioral or usage information is missing.

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 schema fully documents the single 'domain' parameter with an example, so the description does not need to add parameter-level detail. The description's mention of 'domain' adds no new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides.

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 uses a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('Sedo aftermarket listing price for a domain'), and clearly states what it returns (status and price). It also distinguishes itself from other marketplaces and related tools, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 clearly identifies when to use the tool by limiting scope to Sedo and explicitly excluding other marketplaces. It names related tools but does not provide an explicit when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use comparison beyond the data source boundary.

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