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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, so the description is not carrying the full safety burden. It adds useful context about what is returned (role, locations, contact details, online-bookable status), but says nothing about pagination behavior or result volume, which the schema alone covers.

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?

One front-loaded sentence naming the resource and its returned fields, plus a short GraphQL hint. No filler, nothing repeated unnecessarily.

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 usefully enumerates the fields returned, compensating for the missing return-value documentation. Pagination is handled by the schema and safety by annotations, so only minor gaps remain.

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 three parameters (after, first, query) are already fully documented, including the QueryString filter syntax and examples. The description only restates that a query filter is optional, adding no meaning beyond the schema; 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 ('List staff members') and enumerates the returned fields (role, locations, contact details, bookable-online flag), so an agent knows exactly what it gets. It also names the underlying GraphQL root field ('staff'), which disambiguates it from the many other list_* siblings by resource.

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 phrase 'optionally filtered by a query' implies the query parameter is optional filtering, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives. Usage is inferred rather than stated.

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