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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds complementary behavioral context by detailing the return content ('per-visit and monthly ranges, labor, crew, schedule assumptions, and a visual report') and clarifying that it is non-binding and free, which goes beyond the annotations.

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 compact two-sentence structure that front-loads the primary use case and includes an exclusion. Every word adds value, with no filler or repetition.

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 the tool has an output schema and annotations, the description sufficiently covers the essential context: scope (commercial/office), geography (US), cost (free), type of output, and key disclaimer. It is complete for an estimation tool with these structured aids.

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 only 10%, and the description does not explain any of the 10 parameters or how they affect the estimate. It only vaguely mentions 'schedule assumptions,' failing to compensate for the low schema coverage. Most parameter semantics must be inferred from names/enums alone.

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 tool provides a 'free office or commercial cleaning budget estimate in the United States,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from the residential sibling tool by explicitly excluding residential cleaning.

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 says 'Use this when a user wants a free office or commercial cleaning budget estimate' and includes 'Do not use for residential cleaning or present it as a binding bid.' This gives explicit when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, effectively differentiating from alternatives.

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