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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false; description adds concrete details: approximate count of ~120 feeds, filtering options, and what the response contains (categories list). No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no filler. Every sentence adds value: scope, filtering guidance, and follow-up usage. Efficient and well-organized.

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?

Given output schema exists, description need not detail return values. However, it mentions the response includes a `categories` list and number of feeds, which is helpful. Covers essential usage, filtering, and follow-up. Fully complete for this 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds meaning beyond schema: explains `compact` as 'keep payload small' and `category` as filter with example values from the response. Provides context missing from field descriptions.

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 states specific verb 'List' and resource 'change-intelligence feeds' with detailed enumeration of included fields (source slug, label, question, prices, endpoints). Distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning the returned `source` slug is used with `preview_feed`.

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?

Clear context for use: suggests filtering by `category` and using `compact: true` to reduce payload. Mentions follow-up action with `preview_feed`. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tools, but context is sufficient.

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