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

Goes well beyond annotations: discloses contact address policy (generic only, never personal), technology cap (up to 10), same scrape as /scrape but half price, free prompt-injection scan, no charge for unusable pages or missing business name, and exact pricing ($0.005 USDC, x402, eip155:8453). Annotations only say readOnly/idempotent/openWorld; the description adds all the economically critical behavior.

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?

Single dense paragraph, front-loaded with the output definition, then pricing and failure policy. Every sentence carries information, though it could be broken into bullets for readability. No wasted words.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description fully specifies output structure, contact policy, price model, failure charging, and an included security feature. An agent knows exactly what it will pay and get.

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 100% with a clear example (mailchimp.com), so baseline is 3. The description reinforces the domain input but adds no new parameter-level detail. Score 4 because the schema is fully self-documenting and the description doesn't muddy it.

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?

States a specific verb (returns a company card) and resource (company website domain), with the exact output contents enumerated: business name, contact address type, technologies. Distinguishable from siblings like scrape_business or enrich_business by the compact card output and domain input.

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?

Implicitly defines context: use for a quick company card from a domain, alternatives are /scrape (with evidence detail, higher price) and presumably scrape_business. It doesn't explicitly say when NOT to use or name all siblings, but the comparison to /scrape gives clear selection guidance.

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