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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context that updates are incremental and tied to a live session, but it does not disclose behaviors like cursor progression, session expiration, or whether updates are consumed by polling.

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 sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the key behavior ('Fetch incremental updates') right after the tool name and avoids repeating schema or annotation 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?

The description is adequate for a read-only fetch tool with fully documented parameters, but it leaves the cursor/polling loop unexplained: an agent may not know whether the response contains a new cursor to feed back in subsequent calls. Since there is no output schema, a bit more guidance about the incremental update cycle would improve completeness.

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 description coverage is 100%, and each parameter already has a meaningful description in the schema. The tool description adds no new parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') with a precise resource ('incremental updates for an active search_people request'). It clearly distinguishes this follow-up tool from the initial search_people tool, and 'incremental' signals delta or pagination behavior rather than a fresh search.

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 states the prerequisite explicitly: this is for an active search_people request. That makes it clear the tool should be called after search_people rather than as an initial entry point. It does not explicitly name alternatives or non-use cases, but the context is strong enough for an agent to infer the intended flow.

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