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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by specifying the rolling window behavior and 'Public — no auth required', which goes beyond the annotations. It does not mention pagination or ordering beyond 'most-recently-published', but the annotations cover the safety profile.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then adding usage and parameter semantics. Every word earns its place with no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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 simple list-retrieval tool with only two parameters and strong annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, window semantics, and auth requirements. The lack of an output schema is not a significant gap since the return format is straightforward for a list of recent cases.

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 compensate. It adds meaning to the 'window' parameter by explaining the values: 'window=today (~24h) | week (default) | month.' It does not explain 'limit', but that parameter is simple and has clear schema constraints, making it less critical.

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's function: 'Return the most-recently-published Declassified cases over a rolling window.' It specifies a distinct resource ('Declassified cases') and a specific behavior (most-recently-published, rolling window), which differentiates it from siblings like search_declassified and get_declassified_case.

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 usage guidance: 'Use for "what's new in Declassified this week" style prompts.' This clearly indicates when to use the tool, but does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use, so it falls short of a 5.

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