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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint. Description adds value by specifying batch limit (1-50 loan_ids), return format { results, errors }, and listing key returned fields. This goes beyond annotations.

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 paragraph with clear sentences: first lists return fields, then usage guidance, then parameter format. It is efficient and front-loads key information, though could be slightly more structured.

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 one parameter, no output schema, and read-only nature, the description is comprehensive: explains input constraint, expected output fields, and batch result shape. It adequately covers the tool's context.

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%, but description explains loan_ids parameter as an array of strings with size limit 1-50. This adds essential semantics beyond the bare schema.

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 it returns full loan contract detail by ID, listing many specific fields. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling openfinance_list_loans by suggesting usage after listing, making purpose and differentiation very clear.

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 explicitly states 'Use after openfinance_list_loans to deep-dive on a specific contract,' providing clear when-to-use context. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the guidance is strong.

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