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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description reinforces that while adding genuinely new facts: results are ordered 'newest first', the call spends no credits, and it is restricted to property prospects. It does not cover paging, result volume, or what happens for non-property prospects.

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 short sentences, all front-loaded with the resource and ordering stated first. No filler, though the clipped sentence fragments read slightly telegraphic rather than fully polished.

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 single-parameter read-only list call with rich annotations and no output schema, the description covers scope, ordering, and cost profile. Only the return shape (photo URLs?) and paging behavior remain unstated, which is a minor gap at this complexity.

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?

Only one parameter (nested path.id), and the schema already carries an example ('prospect_123') and a description despite the reported 0% aggregate coverage. The description implies the parameter via 'of the prospect's property' but never states the required prospect ID or whether it accepts IDs from any source, so it adds little beyond the schema.

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?

Specific verb plus resource ('List prospect photos') with added scope: 'Photos of the prospect's property, newest first' and 'Property prospects only'. An agent can distinguish this from dealmachine_post_prospects_id_photos and dealmachine_delete_prospects_id_photos_photo_id on verb alone.

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?

'Property prospects only' is a genuine precondition that tells the agent when this call is valid. However, it never contrasts with the closely-named sibling dealmachine_get_prospects_id_files (files vs photos), so the choice between the two is left to inference.

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