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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden, and it fully discloses the behavioral contract: calling it here returns a structured 'moved' error naming the host, and the shim is temporary. The agent knows exactly what to expect at runtime.

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 short sentences deliver all necessary information: the migration, the replacement endpoint, and the runtime behavior. The key fact is front-loaded in the first sentence, with no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 parameterless shim with no output schema, the description is complete: an agent knows not to invoke it as a real data tool, knows what error it will receive, and knows exactly where to find the true implementation. Nothing essential is missing for correct invocation or handling.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and the schema is empty, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description correctly avoids inventing parameter-related details and focuses on the shutdown/redirect behavior, meeting the baseline for a parameterless tool.

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 clearly states the tool is a deprecated shim: it has moved, it is served elsewhere, and calling it here returns a structured 'moved' error. It names the exact replacement host and the tool name used there, which distinguishes it from all sibling tools and prevents an agent from treating it as a functional data getter.

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 explicitly tells the agent where to go instead (the Bitcoin Credit Stack MCP URL) and what happens if it calls this shim here. This is clear when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance with an explicit alternative, leaving nothing to inference.

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