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

No annotations means the description carries the burden. It discloses filtering and summary stats, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, pagination details, or exactly what the summary stats include. 'List' implies a safe read operation, but more behavioral detail would help.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. Every clause adds meaningful guidance—filter options, special mode, and sort hints—with no wasted words.

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 tool with no output schema, the description explains the main purpose and a special mode, but does not describe the return structure beyond 'summary stats,' nor pagination or soft-delete behavior. It is adequate for basic use but leaves 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by noting that omitting contact_id switches to a cross-contact tracker with summary stats, which is not evident from the schema alone. It also highlights sort_by and sort_order, reinforcing their relevance.

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 opens with 'List gifts,' a specific verb and resource, and immediately clarifies optional filters (contact, status, direction). The added note about omitting contact_id for a cross-contact gift tracker with summary stats distinguishes this from sibling tools like contact_list and gift_manage.

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 clear usage context: filters, sorting, and the two modes (contact-specific vs. cross-contact tracker). It does not explicitly name alternative tools for mutation, but the 'List' verb and filter options imply appropriate usage well.

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