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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, so the 'runs straight away' sentence adds only a little. The real value is the field semantics — is_active vs has_conditions vs post_status and the 'draft + conditions + not active = won't render' interpretation rule — which tells the agent how to read and reason about the results without an output schema.

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?

Front-loads what is listed, then field semantics, then the filter usage — a logical order. Slightly dense with field-by-field definition, and the trailing Royally/read-only sentence is environment boilerplate rather than tool-specific information.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the row-shape explanation well (type, title, assignment, publish state, rendered) plus the meaning of the three ambiguous flags. Missing only pagination/ordering/result-size expectations for what could be a multi-row listing.

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 100% and the description's 'active: true returns only rendered site parts' restates the schema's own wording almost verbatim. site_id is untouched, but the schema already covers both fully, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('Lists Theme Builder site parts like header, footer, 404 page') and enumerates the row fields returned. It is distinguishable from elementor-manage-site-parts by the list-vs-manage framing, though that sibling distinction is never made explicit.

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 says how to narrow results ('Pass active: true to return only site parts that are currently rendered') and explains the draft/conditions edge case, but it never states when to choose this over elementor-manage-site-parts or elementor-list-posts, nor any exclusions.

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