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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description need not repeat safety. The description adds the HTTP method (GET) and filter parameters, but does not disclose pagination behavior, default page size, or any potential rate limits. With high annotation coverage, the description adds minimal behavioral context beyond what is already known.

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?

The description is exceptionally concise: two sentences totaling 25 words. It front-loads the core purpose and follows with the API endpoint for developer reference. No unnecessary information is included, and the structure is efficient.

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?

Given that there is no output schema, the description should indicate what the tool returns (e.g., a list of license keys) and mention pagination defaults. While the schema documents page_size and page_number, the description does not clarify that the response is paginated or that default page size is 10. For a list tool with six optional parameters, the description is adequate but incomplete.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all 6 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add parameter-specific details beyond mentioning the filter options for store_id, order_id, and product_id. The API path and filter parameter names are provided, but the schema already covers each parameter's meaning.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'license keys', making the purpose evident. It also mentions optional filtering by store, order, or product. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling list tools, though the resource is unique among siblings.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other list tools or alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or context for filtering. The lack of usage context forces the agent to rely on tool name alone.

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