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

Annotations provide no behavioral hints (all false), so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'POST' indicating a mutation, but does not disclose side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or the nature of the generated link. This is minimal transparency beyond the HTTP method.

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 directly states the action and input. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no redundant information.

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?

Given the tool has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotation hints, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the purpose of 'data' and 'account', nor the output format or any side effects. The description covers only the basic action and email input, leaving significant gaps.

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%, so the description must explain all parameters. It only mentions 'email' (through 'pelo email'), which clarifies its role, but 'data' and 'account' are not described. The description adds some value for email but fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions for other params.

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 the tool generates an SSO link for the MyOrders purchase area using a buyer's email, providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by its narrow focus on SSO link generation, though it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives.

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 when an SSO link for MyOrders is needed, but it does not provide explicit context, prerequisites, or alternatives. There is no guidance on when not to use this tool or how it compares to other tools like guru_contacts_get, so usage is only implicitly inferred.

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