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

Annotations already cover read-only/idempotent/closed-world, but the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: a shared HTTP endpoint without per-caller auth only permits nameless listing where each MCP session owns a workspace, and never for a sessionless request. That access-control nuance is real value, though the sentence is dense enough to be hard to parse on first read.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and the entry-point cue; every sentence carries information. The final sentence is overloaded with nested conditions (auth mode, workspace-per-session, no-session requests), which slightly hurts readability.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation here. The description covers the one parameter's origin, the ordering relative to brapi_dataframe_query, and the availability constraint — nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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% and the schema already documents omission-vs-set behavior, so the baseline is 3. The description goes further by explaining where the value comes from ('result.dataframe.tableName' on spilled find_* responses), which the schema cannot express.

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 ('Lists dataframes (or describes one)') plus exactly what it returns: columns, row counts, and originating-source provenance. It is clearly distinguishable from brapi_dataframe_query, which it names and positions itself ahead of.

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?

Gives explicit timing ('Start here after a spillover'), the trigger condition (a find_* response that spilled), and the sequencing rule ('inspect schema and provenance before writing the first brapi_dataframe_query'). It also states when listing without a name is unavailable and what to do instead (pass a known name).

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