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

Even without annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it returns payment resource details, includes a Merkle-anchored attestation, and explicitly states what it does NOT return (no recommendation). Cost and endpoint are also transparent.

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?

Every sentence in the description adds value: purpose, contents, exclusions, cost, endpoint, alternatives, and parameter format. No fluff or redundancy.

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?

Comprehensive for a paid, special-purpose tool. Covers purpose, components, payment details, endpoint, relationship to free siblings, and the single parameter. No critical operational details are 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?

Schema covers the only parameter with a description matching the tool's mention of 'r...' format. Description adds no new semantic information beyond the schema, so baseline applies.

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?

Clearly states the tool returns the full underwriting-inputs bundle for an XLS-66 decision, listing specific components. Also distinguishes from sibling tools by noting free alternatives for some data.

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?

Explicitly notes this is a paid x402 call with cost and endpoint, states there is no free tier or API key, and directs users to get_lending_exposure and screen_address_ofac for free components. No ambiguity about when to use this tool.

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