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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that results are paginated and status-filterable, without saying what an "opportunity" record contains or how date-range filtering interacts with the rest.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Its brevity is efficient rather than padded, though the terseness borders on under-specification for a 7-parameter tool.

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?

Seven parameters, no output schema, and a mutation-free read — the schema and annotations carry most of the load, so the description is minimally sufficient. Still missing: what an opportunity record includes, whether date range is required to be bounded, and how this differs from the other account-insight tools.

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%, so page, size, sort, status, domains, startDate and endDate are all documented in the schema itself. The description merely echoes status filtering and pagination, adding no semantics beyond it — baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Specific verb + resource ("Get opportunities") scoped to domains, with the two main dimensions of variation (status filter, pagination) named. It is distinguishable from nearby siblings like get_account_details or get_account_summary_insights, though the title's word "insights" is never reconciled with the plain "opportunities" phrasing.

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?

No statement of when to reach for this versus get_account_summary_insights, account_funnel_reports, get_account_details, or account_level_stats. An agent faced with several account-oriented siblings gets no routing signal beyond the words in the name.

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