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

With no annotations, the description transparently states it returns both active and exhausted redemptions with status, and that it is free but requires npub proof. It does not detail side effects (none expected) or pagination, but is sufficient for a read operation.

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?

Two concise sentences convey purpose, return details, and a requirement with no unnecessary words. Structure supports quick comprehension.

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 simple parameters and existence of an output schema, the description covers core functionality and return values. Minor gaps (e.g., dpop_token meaning) but overall complete for a list tool.

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%, so description must compensate. It clarifies npub as a required proof, adding meaning beyond the schema. However, dpop_token is not explained, leaving a gap.

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 lists coupons redeemed by a specific patron on the operator, with details on returned status types. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'schwab_list_coupons' which likely lists all coupons.

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 usage for retrieving a patron's redeemed coupons and mentions a prerequisite (proof of npub), but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool over alternatives like 'schwab_list_coupons' or 'schwab_update_coupon'.

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