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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds the 'GET /api/integration/all-currencies' endpoint and the 'every currency the platform supports' scope, which is useful context, but it does not describe pagination behavior, return shape, or authentication requirements.

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 sentences with zero waste. The primary scope statement is front-loaded, followed by the endpoint reference, making it easy to scan.

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 simple, read-only listing tool with full schema coverage and a readOnlyHint annotation, the description is largely complete. Its main gap is not explicitly naming or differentiating from limoexpress_list_organisation_currencies, but the 'every currency the platform supports' wording does enough to imply global scope.

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 the three parameters (page, per_page, search_string) are already fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is the baseline expectation when schema coverage is high.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'List every currency the platform supports.' This is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish this global currency list from the sibling tool limoexpress_list_organisation_currencies, so an agent must infer the difference from the 'platform supports' wording.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, particularly limoexpress_list_organisation_currencies. The description gives no exclusions or prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name and scope phrase.

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