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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the 1 CRD per-call cost, that cost is charged even on rejection, that a 429 RATE_LIMITED is free, and that error results carry a request_id to quote to support. It omits auth requirements and pagination behavior, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with purpose and filters, then cost and error handling. No wasted 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?

For a 9-parameter, no-output-schema, no-annotation tool, it covers purpose, filters, cost, and error handling well. The main gap is pagination semantics (limit/offset) and what 'total' represents.

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 coverage is 67%, and the description adds semantic grouping by naming the filter dimensions (status, holder, reference_id), but it says nothing about limit/offset pagination or the x402_payment fallback, leaving those to the schema.

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 and resource ('List escrow holds'), plus ordering ('newest first') and a return aggregate ('with total'). The list verb cleanly separates it from the create/capture/release escrow siblings.

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?

Names the filterable dimensions (status, holder, reference_id), which implies when the tool is useful, but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or pointers to sibling tools for related operations.

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