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

No annotations provided, but the description fully discloses behavior: it lists redeemed coupons, returns both active and exhausted with specific status values, and is free. It also notes the required npub proof, which aligns with the schema.

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 short (two sentences plus a list) and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or extraneous information.

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 tool has an output schema (not shown) which likely covers return values; the description mentions status values. However, it lacks parameter explanations and does not address any side effects or limitations. Still, it is mostly complete for a simple read operation.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the npub or dpop_token parameters beyond mentioning npub proof. It fails to add meaning to the parameter semantics, leaving the agent uninformed about their purpose or format.

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 resource 'coupons this patron has redeemed on this operator', distinguishing it from siblings like cypher_list_coupons. It also specifies the returned statuses and the prerequisite (npub proof).

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 description implies when to use: to view a patron's redeemed coupons. It mentions it's free and requires npub proof, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with alternatives like cypher_list_coupons.

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