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

Annotations declare readOnly=false, idempotent=false, destructive=false, openWorld=true, but the description adds the material context: it spends credits, charges exactly the quoted amount ('never more'), is single-use, and expires in 10 minutes. That is billing and irreversibility information the annotations cannot express.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the cost consequence ('Spends credits.'), followed by behavior, consent requirement, and expiry. Every sentence carries a distinct, actionable fact with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. Cost, charge cap, user consent, expiry, and single execution are all covered, leaving nothing an agent must know before invoking the 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% for the single quote_id parameter, and the description's statement that the quote comes from search_nyc_preforeclosures duplicates what the schema already says. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema carries the parameter meaning.

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 the NYC preforeclosure rows from a quote') and explicitly ties itself to the sibling that produces the quote (search_nyc_preforeclosures). An agent can distinguish this consume-the-quote step from the search step without opening either schema.

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?

Explicit prerequisites and sequencing: call only after search_nyc_preforeclosures, tell the user the credit cost and obtain approval first. It also gives the failure condition (quotes expire after 10 minutes and run once), which is exactly the when/when-not guidance an agent needs.

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