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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/non-openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: the regex is case-insensitive, restricted to a 'safe subset', and results are 'lightweight metadata'. The safe-subset restriction is notable but never specified, and pagination behavior is unmentioned.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and scope, then usage, then semantics. Slight redundancy between the first sentence and the 'Use when...' sentence, but no wasted verbiage.

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 no output schema, the description owes more on return values than 'Returns lightweight metadata'. Pagination guidance (page/page_size interaction with results) and result ordering are absent, leaving the agent with an incomplete picture of what a call yields.

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 carries the burden. It meaningfully enriches the key required parameter (case-insensitive regex, safe subset), but says nothing about page/page_size — those are only self-documenting via schema defaults and bounds. Partial compensation only.

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 ('List Heropedia Hero/Role entries') and constrains scope to entries whose Role name matches a regex, which implicitly separates it from getListByHero. It never names a sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the distinction from the 'Role' filter alone.

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?

Gives a clear when-to-use: 'Use when you want to inspect Heroes offering a particular Role.' No exclusions or named alternatives (getList, getListByHero) are given, so the routing decision is left partly to inference.

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