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

Annotations establish the mutation profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), and the description adds that generation is asynchronous and takes 1-2 minutes, which is valuable behavioral context beyond the structured fields. It doesn't note that idempotentHint=false means repeated calls may create duplicate reports, a minor 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?

Front-loaded with purpose, then latency, then next step, then args in a scannable layout. The opening two sentences overlap ('Generate an AI visibility report' / 'Creates a comprehensive report...'), a small redundancy.

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 an async generation tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, latency expectation, and the retrieval path via get_reports, which is what an agent needs to call and follow up correctly. Details like duplicate-call behavior are the only meaningful omission.

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 only 25%, so the description must carry parameter meaning, and it does: it documents brand_id as required, interprets report_type values ('executive' (summary), 'weekly', 'full'), and lists time_range options with defaults. It omits the schema-documented user_intent param, but overall compensates well for the low coverage.

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?

States a specific verb (generate) and resource (AI visibility report) and adds scope ('analyzing the brand's AI search visibility'). The name and description clearly separate it from retrieval siblings like get_reports and compare_reports, though the first two sentences restate the purpose somewhat.

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?

Explicitly names get_reports as the follow-up for checking status and retrieving the finished report, which is actionable guidance. However, it gives no 'when-not-to-use' exclusions and doesn't explain how to choose between report_type variants at the usage level.

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