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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return content (remaining proof count plus a deposit address), which is valuable since there is no output schema, but it says nothing about whether the call is read-only, whether it requires auth, or how the address behaves.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the primary output (remaining count) and adds the secondary one (deposit address) without any filler.

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 tool with no output schema, naming both returned values covers most of what an agent needs. The only gap is unstated auth/environment prerequisites, which is minor for this complexity level.

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, so the baseline is 4; nothing about parameter semantics needs explaining.

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 ("Show") and the exact two quantities returned: the remaining Proof-100 count and the BTCZ deposit address. The sibling tools (timestamp_fingerprint, timestamp_text) are unrelated, so no disambiguation is needed.

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 never states when an agent should call this versus other tools, nor any prerequisites (authentication, wallet setup, or network). Usage must be inferred from the phrase "proofs are left."

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