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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the storefront URL is fixed server-side and that output is normalized, but says nothing about auth, rate limits, or pagination behavior beyond schema defaults.

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?

Short and front-loaded: purpose first, then the fixed URL caveat, parameter defaults, and the sibling pointer. The parameter defaults duplicate the schema, but the overall length is appropriate.

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?

Output schema exists, parameters are documented, and annotations cover read-only/open-world safety. The description routes to the singular detail tool and notes the fixed URL, making it sufficiently complete for a simple paginated list tool.

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% and the description simply restates the same defaults and maximum for limit and page. It adds no syntax or semantic meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3.

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 and resource ('Returns normalized static pages') and names the target store, plus distinguishes from the singular psastore_page tool. An agent can tell it is the collection/list endpoint for PSA Store pages.

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?

Names psastore_page as the alternative for retrieving a single static page. Context is clear, though it does not explicitly state when not to use this collection endpoint or mention other nearby psastore siblings.

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