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

Discloses side effects: 'persists automation settings that affect future delegation/sell behavior; not idempotent — calling twice may reset fields.' Annotations indicate `readOnlyHint: false`, `idempotentHint: false`, and description adds contextual details like requiring a signature session. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Two well-structured sentences. First sentence states core purpose and return value. Second covers side effects, idempotency, requirements, and alternatives. Every sentence adds unique value, no fluff.

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?

Despite the tool's complexity (3 nested object parameters), description covers purpose, side effects, non-idempotency, prerequisites, and failure conditions. Output schema exists (though not shown) and return type is mentioned ('Returns the persisted autoSettings payload'). One minor gap: no explicit mention of output schema details, but sufficient for selection.

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?

Input schema has extensive descriptions for nested properties (e.g., `poolSetting`, `addOnFeature`). Schema coverage appears high (despite context stating 0%, likely a data issue). The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema for parameters, so 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?

Description clearly states 'Create the initial auto-sell configuration for the authenticated user.' It specifies the verb ('create') and resource ('initial auto-sell configuration'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'tronsave_update_auto_sell_setting' and 'tronsave_get_user_auto_setting'.

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?

Explicitly advises 'Use for FIRST-TIME setup only; for subsequent edits use `tronsave_update_auto_sell_setting`, and always read the current state with `tronsave_get_user_auto_setting` first to avoid overwriting unknown fields.' This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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