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

readOnlyHint=true already declares this is a safe read, and the 'GET /funds' endpoint restates that. The description adds no further behavioral detail such as pagination behavior (which matters given skip/take) or rate limits, but the annotation bar is low here.

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 short clauses, front-loaded with the purpose and backed by a concrete example and the underlying endpoint. Zero waste.

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?

A simple read-only list tool with fully documented parameters and an annotation covering safety; the description's remaining gap is return shape, but the absence of an output schema is a minor omission for a straightforward listing call.

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%, so all six filter parameters (ids, skip, take, search, is_active, is_default) are already fully documented in the schema. The description contributes nothing beyond that, 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 (List) and resource (funds) and adds domain context with examples ('General Operating, Scholarship'), so an agent knows these are designation categories for gifts. It is distinct from siblings like list_campaigns or list_appeals, though it never explicitly contrasts with them.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. The agent gets no signal about when this is the right call versus other list tools.

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