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

Annotations already cover read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds the meaningful scoping detail that only currently published cranes are returned, implying the result set can change over time, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, ordering, or response structure.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It communicates the core purpose immediately and every word earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and five optional parameters, the description is too sparse to fully support correct invocation. It fails to mention that type and brand act as filters or that limit/cursor/offset control pagination, leaving important behavioral gaps for the agent.

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 0%, yet the description adds no information about the five optional parameters: type, brand, limit, cursor, and offset. An agent must infer filtering and pagination semantics entirely from parameter names and schema constraints.

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 clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'currently published Gkmex cranes', making the tool's scope unambiguous. The singular/plural distinction from get_crane and compare_cranes helps an agent select this tool for bulk listing.

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 phrasing 'every currently published' conveys that this tool is for retrieving the full set of published cranes, not a single crane or a comparison. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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