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

Annotations cover readOnly and openWorld safety. The description adds non-obvious behavioral detail: pagination semantics and, notably, that a valid empty page returns 200 with no collections (useful for agent error handling). No auth or rate-limit context, but the edge-case disclosure is valuable.

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: purpose first, then routing. Zero waste; the empty-page edge is stated compactly.

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?

Complete for a simple paginated list tool with an output schema (return values need not be explained), full annotation coverage, and clear sibling routing. Nothing needed to call it correctly 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 coverage is 100% with defaults and max documented for both page and limit. The description only says the params 'paginate', adding no format/syntax value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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+resource (List normalized Brooklinen collection records) and scope (fixed public storefront). Explicitly distinguishes itself from brooklinen_collection_products and brooklinen_page, so the agent can route correctly without opening schemas.

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?

Explicitly routes to brooklinen_collection_products for products within a collection and brooklinen_page for static pages – strong alternative guidance. No explicit 'when not to use' beyond that, but the sibling mapping is the essential one.

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