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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and non-openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuine behavioral fact the annotations do not carry: an organizer key is required for authorization.

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 the resource list first. It is efficient, though the missing punctuation between 'CSV' and 'Needs' makes the two ideas run together.

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 one-parameter exporter this is largely adequate: destination format (CSV) and auth requirement are stated. However, with no output schema, it gives no hint about what columns or scope the export contains, leaving a small gap.

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?

There is only one parameter (slug) and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema even providing a concrete URL example. The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline of 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?

Names a specific verb (Download) and the exact resources available (votes, survey responses, hunt players) in CSV form. It is clear enough to separate from generic readers, but it never explicitly distinguishes itself from close siblings like get_results or list_responses, which cover overlapping data.

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 phrase 'Needs the organizer key' signals a prerequisite but says nothing about when to choose this over get_results or list_responses. Usage is only implied by the CSV output format.

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