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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description is not required to repeat safety. It adds behavioral context by listing the specific return items (registration URL, welcome bonus, code snippets) and the 'final step' role. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action verb and resource, and immediately states the return values and usage ordering. Every phrase earns its place with no fluff or repetition of schema content.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters, a comprehensive output schema, and strong annotations, the description fully covers the necessary context. It explains the purpose, returns, and sequencing, leaving no obvious gaps for an agent to misuse the tool.

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, and the schema coverage is 100%, meaning there are no parameter semantics to clarify. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description adds no parameter information because none is needed.

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 uses the specific verb 'get' with the resource 'Gonka Network signup link', clearly stating it returns a registration URL, welcome bonus, and code snippets. It also situates itself as 'the final step' after calculate_savings(), distinguishing it from sibling tools like register_on_gonka.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'call this after calculate_savings() to start saving immediately.' This provides clear sequencing and context, effectively guiding the agent on when to invoke it relative to other tools.

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