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

Beyond the `readOnlyHint: true` annotation, the description discloses the default exclusion of restricted and zero-value listings, the effect of `includeRestricted`, the meaning of `totalActive` and `matchedCount`, and a specific rate limit. This adds substantial behavioral context about the tool's outputs and constraints.

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 dense yet efficient. Every sentence carries unique information: the main action, default behavior, a conditional invocation, return field semantics, and rate-limit details. There is no redundant phrasing, and the structure flows logically from purpose to details.

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, filterable listing tool with four optional parameters, the description covers all essential aspects: what it returns, how filters work, the effect of `includeRestricted`, and rate limiting. The lack of an output schema is compensated by the explicit naming of `totalActive` and `matchedCount`. No critical information is missing.

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?

The input schema already documents all four parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds meaningful context, such as `includeRestricted` bringing in private bundle sales, and clarifies that `totalActive` uses the same denominator as `get_floor_price`. It doesn't fully restate schema details, but enriches the agent's understanding of parameter effects.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get currently listed CryptoPunks from the native marketplace.' It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on marketplace listings and by referencing 'same denominator as get_floor_price' to align with that tool's semantics.

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 provides clear usage context: default behavior includes only publicly buyable listings, how to include restricted ones via `includeRestricted: true`, and optional price-range filtering. It also gives rate limits and shared bucket context. There is no explicit alternative tool discussion, but the instructions are actionable and sufficient for most use cases.

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