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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds domain-specific behavior: it should be used to select explicit crew wallets, with a Zora preference for registered evm_wallet / Base addresses, though it does not describe return format or pagination behavior.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance and a special case. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 read-only directory listing with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage workflow, and a Zora-specific address preference. It is incomplete mainly in not differentiating from crew_search_kols and not noting pagination or result shape, though the schema covers the pagination parameters.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already documented in the schema. The description only echoes the q filter ('optionally filtered by q') and adds no new syntax or meaning beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List/browse CREW KOL profiles (optionally filtered by q).' It also clarifies the selection goal ('select explicit crew wallets before launching') and distinguishes from the Autohire fallback, so an agent can identify the tool's scope without opening the schema.

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 clear context for when to use: before launching on pumpfun, bags, or zora, with manual pick first and Autohire as a fallback. However, it does not explicitly compare with the sibling crew_search_kols, so sibling differentiation for search versus listing is left to the name.

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