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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds meaningful behavioral detail: the tool wraps results as { data, pagination } when more pages exist, and it lists receipts newest first. This goes beyond the schema and annotations, though it does not enumerate rate limits or authentication expectations.

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 short sentences with no filler: the core behavior, the API endpoint, and the response wrapper are each stated once. Every sentence earns its place and the most important info comes first.

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 listing tool with 100% schema coverage, the description covers ordering, pagination wrapper, and the endpoint. The only notable omission is that it does not explain what each receipt object contains, but with no output schema and six optional params, that is a minor gap; an agent can still decide to call it correctly.

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% and every parameter has a clear description, including the legacy pagination note on 'page'. The tool description itself doesn't add parameter meaning beyond schema, but it does mention response wrapping that helps interpret pagination parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 receipts'), adds ordering behavior ('newest first'), identifies the underlying API endpoint (GET /receipts), and clarifies the wrapped response shape. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like get_receipt (single resource) and list_invoices (different resource).

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 implicitly indicates this is for listing receipts and mentions legacy vs. preferred pagination via the page parameter schema ('prefer created_before'), giving the agent clear context for how to paginate. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives or state when-not-to-use, but the API endpoint and response wrapper give enough context.

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