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

The description aligns with the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations, stating a read-only 'Return' operation. It does not disclose additional behavioral details such as pagination, rate limits, or default ordering beyond 'most recent', but the annotations already cover the primary safety aspect, so the bar is lower.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the action and object. It is appropriately sized for a simple filtering operation, with no redundant or extraneous wording.

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?

Since there is no output schema, the description should give some indication of the return structure, but it only says 'wire items' without detailing fields or format. It also lacks any mention of result ordering, pagination, or limits beyond the implicit 'most recent'. This is adequate for a domain-savvy agent but leaves some gaps.

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 schema has high parameter description coverage (90%) with most parameters having at least 'Match any.' or examples. The tool description adds no extra meaning to the parameters; the baseline of 3 applies because the schema already provides adequate information.

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 'Return' and the resource 'wire items', with a scope of 'most recent' and 'matching filters'. It distinguishes the tool from potentially similar ones like search_developments or search_events by its specific focus on wire items, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many siblings (e.g., search_developments, wire_storyline). It does not mention any conditions or scenarios that would make this tool preferable, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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