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

Annotations already establish readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, but the description adds genuinely non-obvious traits: no authentication required, no payment side effect ("nothing is charged"), and the exact derivation logic (median of similar approved listings vs. declared value). It stops short of rate-limit or freshness/staleness details, keeping it at 4 rather than 5.

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?

Two tight sentences with the key constraint (no account needed) front-loaded, followed by output semantics and the no-charge reassurance. Zero filler; every clause carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be described, and annotations cover safety. The description handles auth, side effects, and fallback logic; the only material omission is the semantics of the required interface_mode value and what "body" refers to.

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 67%, so the bar is roughly baseline. The description does add meaning for robot_type (similarity matching) and declared_value (fallback basis), but the required interface_mode enum receives no explanation anywhere, leaving a real gap for the one mandatory parameter.

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 states a specific verb and resource: suggesting USD asking rates (hour/day/week/month) for a robot listing, plus the derivation rule (median of approved listings, else declared value). It is trivially distinguishable from siblings like browse_listings or request_lease, which do entirely different things.

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?

"No account needed" and "Display only: nothing is charged" give clear situational context, but the description never says when an agent should call this rather than proceeding straight to create_inquiry or browse_listings. Usage is implied (pre-listing pricing), not explicitly routed.

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