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

Annotations already flag readOnly=false, idempotent=false, and destructive=false. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying B2B/tenant-actor auth, that the JSON body is the bundle, and that domainNameOverride renames the imported domain. It does not detail side effects such as duplicate-import behavior, but the annotation set lowers the burden.

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 sentences deliver the action, source, endpoint, body format, auth mode, and the override behavior. No filler or repetition of the annotations.

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?

The description covers auth, endpoint, bundle provenance, and the optional override, which is enough to make the call. It does not clarify the apparent optionality of bundle (required parameters are 0) or describe the success/error return shape, but those are secondary for invocation.

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 enriches the bundle parameter by naming its producer (ethora-app-export-v2) and explaining the body transport semantics, going beyond the schema's 'exported bundle object' wording. domainNameOverride's effect is essentially restated, not expanded.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Import an App from a bundle produced by ethora-app-export-v2.' It also states the exact endpoint (POST /v2/apps/import), which separates it from create/update/export 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?

It gives a clear usage context: use this when you have a bundle produced by ethora-app-export-v2. It does not explicitly contrast with ethora-app-create or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full exclusion guidance.

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