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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context: no inbox delivery, risk scores for up to 100 addresses, and a 'Never hold' instruction. However, the fragmented phrasing leaves the operational meaning of 'Never hold' and the billing flow unclear.

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 is short but disorganized, mixing pricing, scanning behavior, and ambiguous imperatives like 'Never hold' in a staccato format. Important information is present, but it is not front-loaded into a clear, structured statement of purpose and usage.

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 gives the key outcome (risk scores) and acceptable output categories, but it lacks a clear explanation of pass_token, the SKU/pricing flow, and how this batch tool relates to billing. With no output schema, more explicit return-format detail would be needed for full confidence.

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 only 50%, and the description partially compensates by explaining the addresses limit and that sku addresses_100 covers scan_batch. However, the pass_token parameter is not explained, and phrases like 'looks_20 pack' and 'Stamp ticket' are not clearly mapped to any 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 title 'Scan a batch of destinations' plus the description's 'Risk scores for up to 100 addresses' and 'ok|new|warn|sink' clearly identify a batch risk-scanning tool. It is specific about the resource and the output categories, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the singular meter_scan sibling.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives. It mentions a SKU that 'covers scan_batch' but does not explain when this tool should be chosen over meter_scan, meter_preflight, or other siblings.

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