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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true. The description adds that data is imported, a 30-day time window, and grouping by kind. It also notes it is free, which is a behavioral attribute. No contradiction.

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?

Extremely concise, a single sentence with front-loaded 'FREE' and all key attributes (time window, grouping). No 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 simple stats tool with no output schema, the description conveys data source (imported notices), time range, and grouping. It does not explicitly specify the response format, but it is implied to be a summary. Given the simplicity, it is sufficiently complete.

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?

No parameters exist, so the schema fully covers them. The description correctly does not add parameter details, maintaining the baseline of 4 for zero-parameter tools.

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 tool returns imported notices per publication day for the last 30 days, split by kind. This distinguishes it from siblings like search_tenders (search) or get_tender (single record) by focusing on aggregate statistics.

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 usage for viewing notice statistics but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or when not to. No mention of use cases or exclusions. The 'FREE' hint suggests no cost, but there is no direct guidance.

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