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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety profile. The description adds useful context about the quote being 'signed' and 'revalidated,' but it doesn't clarify the apparent tension between the verb 'Create' and readOnlyHint, nor does it provide additional behavioral details beyond that.

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 one sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'Create,' and contains no unnecessary words. It is efficiently structured for a short tool description, even though it omits important details.

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 tool with four required parameters and no output schema, the description is severely incomplete. It explains neither the parameters' roles, the return value, nor the broader workflow beyond the revalidation note. Significant additional detail is needed for an agent to invoke this tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, but it provides no information about the meaning or use of the four required parameters (bagId, sessionId, targetCoverageSeconds, proofSpanSeconds). The description adds zero value to the schema's bare parameter names and types.

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 the verb 'Create' and the resource 'signed backend quote', and adds a distinguishing detail about revalidation before a provider confirmation link is returned. This differentiates it from sibling tools like storage.provider_funding_preview or storage.provider_funding_session.

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 the tool is used when a signed backend quote is needed and that this happens before returning a provider confirmation link. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusions, leaving the guidance implied rather than explicit.

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