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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds valuable context beyond that: rows are unsigned, availability changes over time, total is a catalog count not a fresh-price count, and there is no automatic pagination. These are meaningful behavioral disclosures.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: endpoint, purpose, unsigned-data warning, availability/count caveat, pagination note. Front-loaded with the operation and scope, then caveats. No redundancy.

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?

With an output schema present, the description needn't explain return values. It covers the unsafe/unsigned data caveat, mutation of availability, and pagination. The main gap is explaining the band and status filter semantics, which are important for effective querying.

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 only 25%, so the description must compensate. It explains pagination limits via 'bounded page' and 'No automatic pagination,' and the schema does document limit behavior well. However, the description does not explain the band or status enum semantics, which carry real meaning for filtering and are undocumented elsewhere.

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 and resource ('Read one bounded page from /api/index/v1/verity/catalog') and clarifies scope ('Discover crypto symbols and their current coverage status and measured cadence'). It implicitly distinguishes from get_index_price/get_index_batch by warning those are for signed receipts.

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?

Explicitly names get_index_price and get_index_batch as alternatives for signed receipts, which routes the agent appropriately. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use conditions or guidance on combining filters, but the core context is clear.

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