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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds value by specifying the scope ('conectados a este install') and the returned fields (id, label, domain), which are not in the annotations or schema. This is useful context beyond the structured data.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and key details. Every word adds value; there is no fluff or redundant language.

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 simple list operation with strong annotations, the description covers the core purpose and return fields. However, it lacks any explanation of the 'account' parameter and provides no usage context relative to siblings. Given the absence of an output schema and the parameter gap, it is not fully complete, but adequate for a basic 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?

The schema has one parameter 'account' with no description (0% coverage), and the tool description does not mention it at all. There is no compensation for the missing schema description, leaving the agent with no guidance on what the parameter means or how to use 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 clearly states that the tool lists Bsoft tenants (domains) connected to this install, and specifies the returned fields (id, label, domain). This is a specific verb+resource with clear scope, distinguishing it from sibling tools that operate on other resources.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage when listing accounts, but does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tools. For a simple list tool, this is acceptable but not enhanced.

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