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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. 'Short, cacheable' adds useful context about response size and caching, but it does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, side-effect free, or safe to call repeatedly.

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 front-loaded sentence followed by a compact behavioral note. Every phrase contributes content or caching context without 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 zero-parameter discovery tool with no output schema, the description adequately states what information the tool provides. It could be slightly stronger by clarifying the return format or how it relates to overlapping sibling tools, but it is otherwise complete enough to call correctly.

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?

There are zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the schema. The baseline for a parameterless tool is 4.

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 names the resource (Lahze) and enumerates the content covered: what it is, its rules, account connection, and Persian memory creation. It is clear enough to distinguish this as an onboarding/discovery tool, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like get_lahze_capabilities or get_authorization_url.

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 explains what the tool covers but gives no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives such as get_lahze_capabilities, get_authorization_url, or get_connection_status. Usage is only implied by the 'Discover' framing.

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