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

The annotations already declare that this is a safe, read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world operation. The description adds useful scope context—32 live canonical calculators and no falsely executable planned items—but does not explain filtering, pagination, or return behavior despite the limit and query parameters.

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 two sentences and front-loads the primary purpose. The second sentence is somewhat defensive but still earns its place by clarifying scope.

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 listing tool, the description could be sufficient, but the two parameters have 0% schema description coverage and there is no output schema. The description therefore leaves important operational details—filtering and limiting—unexplained.

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 0%, and the description does not explain either parameter. It says 'List all 32' without clarifying how limit or query affect the result, leaving both optional parameters entirely undocumented.

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 a specific verb and resource: listing all 32 live canonical calculators from Taminyaran Calculation Center. This clearly separates it from action-oriented siblings such as run_calculator or get_calculator_spec, though it does not explicitly name those 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?

It does not say when to choose this tool over get_calculator_spec, run_calculator, or other siblings. The note about planned Master Map items clarifies scope, but not usage context or exclusions.

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