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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool reports whether each source is fresh, delayed, or stopped, which is meaningful behavioral context. It could be more explicit about output shape or side effects, but for a zero-parameter informational tool this is solid.

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 well-structured sentences: the first enumerates exactly what information is returned, and the second explains the practical purpose. Every phrase contributes meaning, and the most important content is front-loaded.

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 no inputs and no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It specifies the kind of data included, the status categories, and the intended decision-making context. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly and interpret its purpose.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to elaborate on parameters, and the schema already reflects an empty properties object. No additional semantic guidance is required.

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 that the tool provides information about every price source covered by BorsaBovini, including the source's real name, what it measures, its hierarchy weight, publication frequency, and current freshness status. This content is specific and distinct from the sibling tools, making the tool's purpose unambiguous even without an explicit verb.

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 gives a clear use case: 'Serve a sapere quanto fidarsi di un numero prima di citarlo' and also helps identify what is not working. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is strong enough to guide an agent on when to invoke this tool.

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