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

With no annotations to lean on, the description carries the full burden and discloses the key hidden trait: one buyer is undercover and the sale results in jail plus a strike. That is high-value behavioral context rarely surfaced. It stops short of explaining whether the risk is per-buyer, random, or avoidable, and says nothing about payout sizes.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the action and buyer options, followed by the payoff and the penalty. Nothing is redundant and every clause carries either decision-relevant or risk-relevant information.

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?

For a two-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the primary hazard and the buyer set, which is most of what an agent needs. Remaining gaps are modest: no indication of reward magnitude, whether buyer choice affects risk or price, or what a successful sale returns.

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 0%, so the description must supply meaning, and it does partly: it enumerates the three legal buyer values that the schema leaves as a bare string with no enum. The heist_id parameter is only obliquely implied by 'a painting you got away with' and its format/validity is never addressed.

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 (sell) and resource (a painting from a heist) to named Black Market buyers, and enumerates the valid buyer identities. An agent can immediately distinguish this from the read-only sibling black_market_look and from resell_artwork without consulting any 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?

'Sell a painting you got away with' implies the prerequisite (you must hold loot from a completed heist), but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The sibling resell_artwork is never mentioned, so the agent must infer which venue applies to which item.

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