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

readOnlyHint=true already declares safety, and the description reinforces it's a read operation ('List'). The description adds the resource scope (account-level reports) but doesn't cover pagination behavior, rate limits, or result shape — reasonable given annotations carry the safety 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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with zero filler. Every clause earns its place.

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 list tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description is largely complete. It could note that results may need pagination via limit, and there's no output schema to describe return fields. Minor gaps only.

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 each parameter is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what's in the schema, which is the baseline 3 expectation.

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?

Specific verb (list) + resource (reports) + clarifying examples (settlement, payments) and endpoint (GET /reports). Clearly distinguishable from sibling checkout_get_report which fetches a single report.

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?

Implied usage is clear from 'list' vs the sibling get_report, but no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or mention of the alternative is provided. Adequate but not exceptional.

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