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

With empty annotations, description must carry full burden. It discloses auth requirement and inheritance of contract as billable. However, it does not discuss side effects, idempotency, or return values. Acceptable but not fully transparent.

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?

Description is a single dense sentence packed with important information. It is concise but could benefit from structuring into separate notes (e.g., auth requirement separately). Still effective without being verbose.

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?

Missing output schema and annotations; description should clarify return value and how to specify comment vs task vs timelog. The schema partially handles this but description lacks guidance on tool output. Adequate but incomplete.

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. Description adds context about benefitable constraint and inheritance, but does not elaborate on individual parameters beyond schema. Minimal added value.

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?

Description clearly states 'Create a child-event (comment / task / timelog) under an existing contract event.' This specifies the verb, resource, and parent context, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create-contract-event.

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?

Description provides clear context: auth required and constraint on benefitable. It implies usage for child events under contract events, but does not explicitly exclude other uses or mention alternatives. Good guidance but lacks explicit when-not-to-use.

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