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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds non-obvious behavior the annotations cannot convey: codes are MASKED with at least 6 characters hidden, which materially affects how an agent should use the results. It does not discuss pagination or result caps beyond the schema.

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 sentences, front-loaded with what is returned and the masking caveat before the pointer to the sibling tool. Dense but every clause carries information; the trailing endpoint note is the only filler.

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 11 optional params, no output schema and no required fields, the description compensates by describing the shape of the returned records and the masking behavior. It omits pagination guidance, though the schema's offset description covers next_offset, leaving only a minor gap.

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 every parameter is already documented with length, pattern and enum constraints. The description restates the filter dimensions (state, creation/update time, order, SKU, recipient/purchaser email, transaction id) without adding format or edge-case meaning beyond the schema, so the 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 gift cards') and immediately enumerates the returned fields (balance, status flags, title, recipient, expiry, originating order). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling giftup_get_gift_card, which returns a single card in full.

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?

Names the alternative tool and the exact condition that selects it: 'to see one card in full (code and ledger) use giftup_get_gift_card with its code.' It also enumerates the filter axes available here, telling the agent what this tool is for.

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