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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits. It discloses that the operation is restricted and requires a specific proof (Schnorr-signed kind-27235 event), which adds context. However, it does not mention the effect on the system (e.g., immediate activation) or any potential side effects.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, each serving a clear purpose: stating the action and listing a key constraint. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose, making it easy to parse.

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 description covers the essential aspects for a restricted set operation: what it does and who can use it. Since an output schema exists, the lack of return value explanation is acceptable. However, it could mention error conditions or reversibility for fuller completeness.

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?

The description has 0% schema coverage and does not explain the two parameters (dpop_token, model_json). While the purpose hints that model_json is the pricing model specification, it lacks details on format or required structure, leaving the agent with ambiguity.

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 'Set the active pricing model,' which is a specific verb+resource. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like 'get' or 'reset' pricing model, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from them.

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 is restricted to operators by stating 'RESTRICTED to operator' and requiring a valid proof. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'reset_pricing_model' or 'get_pricing_model'.

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