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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool is free, that currentness is unknown, and that pagination uses a cursor. However, it omits error handling, authentication needs, rate limits, and the exact return format or behavior on invalid input.

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 concise and generally front-loaded, starting with the core purpose. The additional clauses are relevant, though the abrupt 'Currentness remains UNKNOWN' feels tacked on rather than smoothly integrated.

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 four parameters including a nested filters object, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It should explain the return type, how to use filters, what 'selectors' means, and the significance of product_id. Key details for correct invocation are 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It only vaguely references 'next_cursor' (schema uses 'cursor') and 'exact filters' without detailing what each filter does, the purpose of 'limit', or the required 'product_id'. Most parameter semantics are left undefined.

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 specific verb ('Discover') and resource ('exact held historical request parameters') for a 'currently configured listed product'. It implicitly distinguishes from paid alternatives by saying 'Free, no payment or purchased evidence', but it does not name or contrast with sibling tools like foundry_products or foundry_purchase_read.

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?

It provides a usage hint ('use next_cursor and exact filters') and mentions the tool is free, implying it is an alternative to paid services. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus its siblings, nor does it specify when not to use it.

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