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

The description instructs the user to include the conversation array with recent messages, adding practical behavioral context beyond the annotations. The annotations already declare idempotency and non-destructiveness, and the description complements without contradicting them.

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, focused sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose and a key usage detail. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with no waste.

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 tool with few parameters and no output schema, the description, combined with annotations and schema defaults, provides sufficient context for correct invocation. A note about post-report behavior could improve completeness, but it is not essential.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for parameter meanings. It clarifies the 'conversation' parameter's purpose, but 'message' and 'context' are left implied. This provides partial, but not complete, compensation.

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 states the tool's function with a specific verb ('report') and resources (bug, missing feature, feedback). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like authenticate and marketplace, which serve different purposes.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool ('report a bug, missing feature, or send feedback') and provides context for invocation. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the distinct purpose makes exclusions unnecessary.

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