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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'Coarse non-personal facts only' and the warning in parameter descriptions about not sending free text or buyer data, which enriches the behavioral context. No contradictions found.

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?

The description consists of two efficient sentences: the first captures the primary purpose and conditions, the second adds safety context. No superfluous words; every element earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (5 parameters, 3 enums, output schema exists but not shown), the description covers the key use case and behavioral constraints. It could be improved by explicitly noting that the country parameter should be 'IT' for Italian buyers, but the schema handles that implicitly.

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 good parameter descriptions. The tool description further clarifies how parameters interconnect (e.g., 'Italian' implies country='IT', 'B2B' ties to customer_type, 'existing company' ties to has_existing_company_list). This adds meaning beyond the schema alone.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Check' and the specific resource (buyer fit for MS-DEC-250), along with key conditions (Italian, B2B, existing company list). It also implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like prepare_order_intent by focusing on eligibility rather than order creation.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (checking eligibility before order), but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives. The directive 'it creates no order' hints at its safe, non-committal nature, but lacks explicit exclusionary guidance.

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