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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine value by enumerating the returned fields (id, quote_number, status, total, valid_until, customer name), which compensates for the absent output schema. It does not mention pagination or the default/max limit behavior, so it is not a 5.

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 tight sentences with zero waste: the first front-loads the action and filters, the second declares the return shape. Nothing is padded or redundant.

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?

With no output schema but a full-coverage input schema and covering annotations, the description fills the main gap by listing return fields and filter intent. It could be slightly more complete by noting result-count limits or ordering, but an agent has enough to call it correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters, including the limit default/max and the expiring_within_days semantics. The description restates the filter dimensions but adds no syntax or behavioral detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Find quotes') and names the optional filter dimensions (status, customer, expiring soon). It does not differentiate itself from lookalike siblings such as quotes_to_follow_up or find_invoices, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

The word 'optionally' implies the filters are all-optional, which is useful, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus siblings like quotes_to_follow_up, nor any exclusion conditions. Usage is only implied.

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