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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses cost ('1 sat per vote'), behavior ('multiple votes allowed'), return format ('Returns JSON: { success, slug, newVoteCount }'), and prioritization logic ('Highest-voted services get prioritized'). Could add error handling details, but overall strong.

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 succinct sentences. First sentence states action and return, second covers cost and allowance, third covers prerequisite and outcome. No fluff, every sentence adds value.

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 two required params, no enums, no output schema, the description covers all necessary context: payment flow, slug discovery, return structure, and voting rules. It is fully adequate for an agent to use correctly.

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% but description adds context beyond schema: for slug it adds 'from list_planned_services', for paymentId it adds '1 sat, must be paid'. This aids correct usage beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states 'Vote for a planned service to be built next' with a specific verb (vote) and resource (planned service). It distinguishes from sibling 'list_planned_services' by mentioning it as a prerequisite, and no other sibling tool duplicates this purpose.

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?

Explicitly says to 'Call list_planned_services first' for valid slugs and vote counts, and 'Requires create_payment with toolName='vote_on_service''. Provides clear when-to-use and prerequisites.

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