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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only hints at access restriction ('Operator-only') and read-only nature, but omits details on authentication, failure modes, or output 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, conveying the essential purpose and access restriction efficiently.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description is incomplete: it does not clarify the role of dpop_token or that npub is effectively required. For a tool with many siblings, more context about what constitutes 'published query keys' would be helpful.

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?

With 50% schema description coverage, the tool description adds no extra meaning to the parameters. The dpop_token parameter remains unexplained, and the npub description in the schema is duplicated; no compensatory information is provided.

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 specifies the verb 'list', the resource 'published query keys', and the scope 'operator's', effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like cypher_get_query or cypher_create_query.

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?

While the description states 'Operator-only', it fails to provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., cypher_get_query), nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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