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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond that: the result is a 'bounded page', the returned fields (id, name, custom domain), and the cursor continuation pattern. This is useful operational detail not present in structured fields.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero waste, front-loading the purpose and then covering return shape and pagination mechanics. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is optional; the description still summarizes the return shape helpfully. Together with annotations and schema, this is nearly complete, though the absence of explicit when-to-use guidance leaves a minor gap.

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 50%: cursor is documented in the schema, but limit lacks a description there. The description compensates by explaining that cursor is a continuation token ('Pass the returned cursor to continue'), adding meaning beyond the schema. Limit's default/max behavior is still not fully clarified, but the description does useful work on the undocumented parameter.

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 clear verb+resource ('List Polyblog blogs') with scope ('the authenticated tenant has access to'). It is easily distinguished from get_blog (singular) and siblings like search_articles or list_topic_ideas.

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 pagination instruction ('Pass the returned cursor to continue') implies iterative usage, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance versus get_blog or other listing siblings. Usage context is only implied.

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