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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the bar is lower. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations: catalog entries can be LEGACY or BLOCKED, are not sellable, and execution is safety-paused. This clarifies real-world limitations not visible in the structured metadata.

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 two sentences, front-loads the core purpose, and every clause adds useful information: canonical discovery, read-only nature, safety-paused execution, and catalog status values. There is 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?

For a zero-parameter read-only discovery tool, the description covers purpose, availability scope, status constraints, and execution blocking. It does not describe the exact output shape, but with no output schema and no parameters, the provided context is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 tool takes zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to document. The description appropriately focuses on what the list contains rather than inputs.

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 clearly states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('canonical Autonomy service capabilities, actual availability, schemas and price readiness'), and identifies itself as read-only canonical discovery. It does not explicitly differentiate from similarly named siblings like autonomy_discover, but the scope is concrete enough to orient an agent.

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 implies this is for read-only catalog/discovery use and explicitly notes that payment and execution remain safety-paused. However, it does not name sibling alternatives or state when to choose this tool over autonomy_discover, autonomy_registry_status, or autonomy_service.

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