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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds filter context but does not disclose pagination behavior, result ordering, or other behavioral details beyond the schema.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The core purpose appears before the optional filter list.

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 simple read-only list tool with five optional parameters and clear annotations, the description is nearly sufficient. Minor gaps remain around result pagination and filter value formats, but the schema covers the limit and key query behavior.

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 60%, with descriptions for limit, query, and online, but city and urgentOnly lack schema descriptions. The description names most filters but adds little syntax or format detail, and does not mention the limit 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 description states a clear verb and resource: list open volunteering opportunities. It is distinguishable from sibling list tools by resource, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as search or list_events.

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?

It implies usage through the optional filters (keyword, city, online/remote, urgent only), but does not state when to use this tool versus siblings or when not to use it.

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