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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description goes further with two facts annotations cannot express: the search index means recently modified POs may be stale, and the endpoint is gated to paid plans. Both materially change how an agent should trust and call the tool.

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 clauses, front-loaded with purpose and scoping, followed by the staleness caveat with the routing alternative, then the access constraint and raw path. Nothing is redundant and nothing is buried.

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 13-parameter, zero-required, read-only search tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, filtering dimensions, staleness, plan gating and the corrective sibling. It stops short of describing the response envelope or pagination flow, though the schema's page/next_page text partly compensates.

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 one of the 13 parameters (including enum semantics for state, sort_by and order) is already documented in the schema. The description mentions supplier, warehouse and line-item data but adds no filter syntax, date-format or pagination detail beyond the schema, so the 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 ('List or search purchase orders') and immediately scopes the payload (supplier, destination warehouse, line items with ordered/received quantities and cost). It also implicitly separates itself from the single-PO sibling by using list/search language.

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?

Explicitly names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it: if a PO was just changed and reads stale, confirm with veeqo_get_purchase_order. It also states the access prerequisite ('Paid Veeqo plans only'), which is exactly the kind of when-you-can-use-this guidance agents need.

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