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

Annotations already indicate read-only, open-world, idempotent, non-destructive. The description adds value by mentioning 'provenance and honest confidence', hinting at output metadata. No contradictions.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and resource. No unnecessary words. Highly efficient.

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 lookup with output schema, the description covers the input and hints at output (provenance, confidence). Could mention invalid ZIP handling, but overall adequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain the 'zip' parameter. It only says 'for a ZIP', missing details like required 5-digit format, examples, or validation. Minimal added meaning.

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 resolves the serving electric utility for a ZIP code, with specific verb 'resolve' and resource 'electric utility'. It is distinct from siblings like 'check_rebates' and 'get_energy_profile'.

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?

Usage context is implied but not explicitly stated. No guidance on when to choose this over sibling tools or when not to use it. The description assumes the user knows to use it for utility lookup.

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