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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the GET endpoint plus the shape of the returned fields, but says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or default result cardinality beyond what the schema states.

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: what it lists, the follow-up tool, and the endpoint. No filler, and the content most needed for selection (the resource and the sibling reference) comes first.

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 read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description tells the agent the key returned fields and how to continue to details. Only the undocumented expand and coin_id parameters leave a minor gap, which the schema's limits partially offset.

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 coverage is 50%: limit and offset are documented in the schema, but expand and coin_id have no description anywhere. The mention of 'currency' hints at coin_id but doesn't state that it filters, and 'expand' is entirely unexplained, so the description only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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 price lists') plus the fields surfaced (name, currency, state), so the agent knows exactly what this returns. It also names the sibling bsale_list_price_list_details as the place to take an id, which distinguishes it from the detail endpoint.

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 implies the list-then-detail workflow by saying 'Use the id with bsale_list_price_list_details', which is a useful handoff. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use condition, no exclusions, and no mention of paging behavior, so usage is largely inferred.

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