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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description does not disclose that saving may overwrite the existing profile or that it is a write operation. It adds no context about data replacement or confirmation. It does not contradict the annotations, but it fails to add value beyond the schema and annotation hints.

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?

The description is only two sentences and is appropriately concise. It front-loads the user-facing instruction ('Tell me about your business') and then states the outcome. It avoids unnecessary fluff, though it could be more specific about the action and side effects.

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 mutation with three parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly adequate. However, given the destructiveHint annotation, it should warn that the profile will be overwritten. It also does not mention whether the profile is saved immediately or requires additional steps. These are minor gaps but not critical for a straightforward tool.

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 all three parameters (location, description, company_name) are already documented. The description adds no additional meaning or constraints beyond what the schema provides. It does hint at the purpose of the description field ('What does your business do?') but that is already in 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?

The description states a clear action ('save your profile') and its purpose (use it to find matching contracts). It distinguishes from the sibling get_my_profile, which is for retrieval. However, it doesn't explicitly say that it updates or overwrites the existing profile, so it's not fully specific about the resource effect.

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 description implies the tool is for initial setup or updating a business profile before searching for contracts, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like get_my_profile or when to re-run it. There is no mention of prerequisites or exclusions.

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