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

The description adds important behavioral context beyond the annotations: 'This submits a real enquiry' signals that the tool has a real-world side effect, and the consent warning reinforces non-idempotency. Annotations already mark readOnlyHint as false and idempotentHint as false, so the description usefully supplements them rather than repeating them.

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 concise sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second adds a critical guardrail. There is no redundancy or filler, and the most actionable information is front-loaded.

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 tool with five fully documented required parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential non-obvious context: this is a real submission requiring user consent. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invokes the tool correctly.

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 each parameter is already documented in the input schema. The description does not add parameter-level meaning beyond indicating that the enquiry contains customer details, which is sufficient given the schema's completeness.

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 description states a specific verb and resource: 'Create a generic quotation enquiry for human pricing.' The term 'generic' differentiates it from the sibling request_titanium_quote, and the title pairs with the description to distinguish it from get_quote_status.

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 a clear usage condition: 'only call it after the user has agreed to submit their details.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but it provides enough context that an agent knows the intended trigger.

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