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 contributes the useful detail that each survey carries question, answers, status, and response count, but says nothing about pagination limits or ordering, which mattered more than repetition of the safe-read profile.

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?

A single tight sentence listing the returned fields, followed by the endpoint. Nothing is padded and the substance is front-loaded.

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 response fields, and the schema carries the pagination cursor. For a two-parameter read filter tool this is close to complete, though ordering and the relationship to survey responses remain unstated.

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 both the page cursor and the status enum are already fully documented in the schema, including the 'pass the previous reply's next_page' instruction. The description adds nothing beyond that baseline.

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 (surveys) and enumerates the fields returned, which pins down what the call yields. It stops short of explicitly distinguishing itself from the closely named sibling buttondown_list_survey_responses.

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 mention of prerequisites, and no routing between this tool and buttondown_list_survey_responses. The only implied usage is the generic 'list' verb, which the agent must infer on its own.

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