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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe, non-mutating read, so the bar is lower. The description adds the required-parameter constraint and ISO8601 format expectation, but omits result-volume behavior, pagination, or limits despite the endpoint being an export. It mostly restates what the schema and annotations already convey.

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?

Dense and front-loaded: filters and sort come first, then the hard constraints and the sibling lookup hint. No filler sentences, though the trailing 'Squadcast: GET /v3/incidents/export' is of marginal value to an agent.

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?

The description covers filters, sorting and required inputs adequately for a 13-parameter tool, and annotations carry the safety profile. The notable gap is any indication of pagination or result-size behavior for a list/export call, which is exactly the info a schema cannot convey.

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 every parameter including enums (sortBy, isStarred, sloAffecting) is already documented in the schema. The description adds only the required/ISO8601 framing, so 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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Search/list incidents over a time window') and enumerates the filter dimensions and sorting it supports. This clearly separates it from siblings like squadcast_get_incident (single record) and squadcast_list_incident_notes.

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?

It specifies that start_time, end_time and owner_id are REQUIRED and routes the agent to squadcast_list_teams to obtain the team id, which is genuine operational guidance. However, it never contrasts this tool with alternatives (e.g., use squadcast_get_incident when you already have an id), so the when-to-use guidance is only implied.

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