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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are ordered 'newest first' and that changes are weekly, which is useful context. It doesn't detail pagination, result volume, or what a sync record contains beyond the named fields.

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?

Front-loads what the tool returns before listing filters, which aids scanning. Two sentences, no redundancy, though the filter list is somewhat dense and could risk being read as exhaustively complex.

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 read-only change-feed tool with 7 optional filters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, ordering, and the filter set. It stops short of describing the shape of a change record or pagination, but with annotations covering safety and schema covering params, this is close to complete.

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% with each parameter fully described in the schema. The description names the filter dimensions (date, max price, categories, min DA, additions only, price drops only) but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides. 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 (get catalogue changes from weekly syncs) and scopes it to publications added/removed and price changes, newest first. Distinguishable from siblings like search_placements or get_placement which deal with current state rather than change history.

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 closing clause gives a clear use case: 'watch for new outlets or cheaper placements without re-reading the whole catalogue.' It implies when to use (change monitoring vs full catalogue reads) but doesn't explicitly name which sibling to use for a full read or current placement lookup.

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