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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds the 'one page' scoping constraint, which is useful, but the result-field enumeration largely restates the output schema rather than adding behavioral context.

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?

Front-loaded with the verb and resource, and the sorting/filtering detail is compact. The trailing sentence enumerating result fields is somewhat redundant given the output schema, but the overall structure is efficient.

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 read-only discovery tool with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description is largely complete: it conveys the paging, sorting, and filtering model. It could say more about pagination limits or how term interacts with category, but nothing essential is missing.

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 the schema already documents all six parameters. The description's listing of sort values, state values, category id, term, and staff picks duplicates the schema rather than adding syntax or format meaning. 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 (browse/search) and resource (Kickstarter's Discover surface of campaigns) with clear scope: 'one page of campaigns matching...'. An agent can distinguish it from siblings like kickstarter_project (detail), kickstarter_comments, and kickstarter_updates.

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?

Describes the filterable dimensions (category id, term, sort, state, staff picks) so usage is implied, but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or routing to alternatives. No exclusions or prerequisites are named.

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