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

With no annotations, the description must disclose all behavioral traits, but it only says 'List recent records.' It does not state that this is a read-only operation, whether authentication is required, how results are ordered, what response format to expect, or how the 'status' filter behaves. This is a significant disclosure gap.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It wastes no words, though it could include more detail without becoming bloated.

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?

For a list tool with an output schema, the description is under-specified. It fails to clarify ordering semantics (e.g., newest-first), the definition of 'recent,' whether the status filter is an exact match, and any pagination behavior beyond the limit parameter. While the schema documents parameter syntax, the description does not fill in operational details an agent would need.

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 input schema provides full descriptions for both parameters (limit and status), including defaults and example values, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline for a high-coverage schema but does not enhance it.

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 uses a clear verb-resource pair: 'List' ... 'Bitcoin notarization records.' It distinguishes from siblings like authority_get_notarization_proof (singular) and authority_notarize_ledger (create action). However, 'recent' is vague and does not specify ordering or time window, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention related tools for single-record lookup or ledger creation, nor does it specify any prerequisites or filtering semantics beyond the parameter schema.

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