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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description adds substantive behavior on top: a hard cap of 100 list memberships, a listsNextCursor truncation signal, an imagesHasMore flag, and an OAuth requirement. These are operational traits an agent cannot infer from the annotations or schema.

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 trigger condition is front-loaded, followed by compaction behavior, then follow-up calls, then the negative routing rule. Every sentence carries distinct information — no repetition of the schema or annotations.

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?

Covers trigger, scope, truncation handling, and auth for a single-parameter read tool. Even though an output schema exists and return values needn't be spelled out, the description still names the payload shape and the two continuation paths, leaving nothing an agent needs in doubt.

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% and the single 'id' property is undocumented, but the description compensates by stating the value identifies 'one exact listing' — implying an id lookup rather than a name or slug match. It stops short of stating format or where the id comes from, so it is not fully complete.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource ('inspect one exact listing by id') and immediately enumerates what the record contains: private notes, images, linked cultivar data, and list memberships. It is clearly distinguishable from daylily.list_listings and the search siblings, which the description names explicitly.

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?

Gives a positive trigger ('when the signed-in user asks to inspect one exact listing by id') and an explicit exclusion ('Do not use this for search or list expansion when daylily.list_listings can return the needed records in one paginated call'). It also routes follow-up work to daylily.list_lists and daylily.list_images with the exact parameters to pass.

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