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

No annotations are present, so the description must carry the full burden of transparency. The description only states 'list contracts' without revealing side effects, data sources, order, pagination, or coverage (e.g., whether it includes all contracts or only those with deadlines). Critical behavioral details are missing.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence, front-loaded with the core action. However, it could include more useful information without losing conciseness, such as mentioning the optional parameters or scope.

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?

The description omits output details (no output schema) and does not explain how results are ordered or filtered. For a simple listing tool, this may be minimally sufficient, but given many sibling tools, more context would help the agent select 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters with descriptions. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what is in the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'list' and resource 'contracts with upcoming closing deadlines'. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like 'list_deadlines' or 'list_alberta_deadlines', which may have similar purposes. The phrase 'upcoming' is clarified by the days parameter in the schema.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention trade-offs, prerequisites, or context where another tool would be more appropriate. The agent must infer from the name alone.

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