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

Annotations already declare the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the description's job is to add context — and it does: filters are applied to the already-fetched public list rather than server-side, responses are paged with a 25 default, and next_offset marks the remainder. That post-fetch filtering nuance is genuinely non-obvious and 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?

Three tight sentences: what is returned first, then filter semantics, then paging. No filler. Slightly dense but front-loaded and every clause carries information.

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?

With no output schema, the description steps in by listing returned fields and exposing next_offset for pagination, so an agent can consume results. Minor gaps remain (county vs name matching semantics, case sensitivity) but 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameters, and it names every one: facility_type with concrete example values ('State Prison', 'Transitional Center', 'County Prison'), county, name_contains, active_only, plus limit (default 25) and offset. No enum or format details for county/name_contains matching remain unexplained, so it compensates well without being exhaustive.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('List Georgia prison facilities') and enumerates the fields returned, so the agent knows exactly what this yields. It is implicitly distinct from the singular sibling get_facility, but the description never names that sibling or state the singular/plural split, so it stops short of a 5.

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 documents how filters behave and how paging works, which tells the agent how to drive the tool, but it offers no when-to-use/when-not guidance or explicit alternative routing (e.g. 'use get_facility for one facility'). Usage is implied by the filter list rather than stated.

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