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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description must carry the rest – and it does add real context: newest-first ordering, amounts in cents, the full state vocabulary, expansion semantics and the underlying endpoint. It stops short of pagination behavior or result-size 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?

Densely front-loaded: resource, scope, ordering, fields and filters arrive before the trailing 'Rewardful: GET /v1/commissions' pointer. It is information-rich rather than padded, though the single long sentence is somewhat packed.

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 5-parameter, all-optional, read-only list tool with no output schema, the description covers scope, filters, expansion and returned fields adequately. Only minor gaps remain: no explicit note on the default page size or how the expanded payload nests.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description earns a bump by explaining what 'expand' actually yields ('the sale (with referral, customer and affiliate) or campaign') and by naming the filterable dimensions, adding meaning beyond the bare enum lists.

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 commissions') and even defines the domain concept ('rewards owed for referred customers' payments'), plus ordering and returned fields. It implicitly separates itself from get_commission/get_payout via 'List', but never names an alternative sibling explicitly.

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 tells the agent how to narrow results ('Filter by affiliate or state; expand the sale ... or campaign'), which is implied usage guidance. It does not say when to prefer this over get_commission (single commission) or list_payouts, nor does it give any exclusion criteria.

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