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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real value beyond them: the page size and the exact shape of each returned record, which matters because there is no output schema. It omits ordering guarantees and what happens past the last page.

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?

A single dense sentence front-loads the resource, then the returned fields, then the paging rate, then the endpoint. Every clause carries information and nothing is repeated.

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 no output schema, the field enumeration in the description is what tells the agent what comes back, and the page-size note covers the main operational constraint. Minor gaps are ordering and end-of-list behavior, which are low-risk for a read-only listing tool.

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 coverage is 100%, with the uuid format (12-char, MF prefix) and the page/next_page chaining already documented in the schema. The description's reference to the endpoint path merely restates the uuid parameter, adding no syntax or semantics beyond structured fields. 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?

Names the resource precisely (coupon groups of a campaign) and enumerates the returned fields (id, name, active flag, coupons with availability), which separates it from the singular referralhero_get_coupon_group. It never states an explicit verb like 'list', relying on the field enumeration and paging note to imply retrieval.

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 guidance on when to call this versus referralhero_get_coupon_group, referralhero_create_coupon_group, or the coupon-related siblings. The only usage hint is pagination ('50 per page'), which is already schema territory, so an agent must infer that this is the bulk-listing tool.

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