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

In the absence of annotations, the description discloses that no payment is required, a verified sign-in is needed, and it is a read-only retrieval operation. It does not mention any side effects or rate limits, but the information is adequate for a non-destructive action.

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?

The description is a single, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose and key features. Every word adds value.

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?

Given no output schema, the description sufficiently explains what the tool returns (trial details: 25 leads, 14 days) and prerequisites (verified sign-in). It is complete for a parameter-less 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. No additional parameter semantics are needed, and the description is not lacking in this area.

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 clearly states the tool returns the official no-card production trial, specifying what it includes (25 live lead deliveries for 14 days). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_leadproof_checkout, which likely involves payment.

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 implies this tool is for obtaining trial details without payment, suggesting it precedes checkout. However, it does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives like get_leadproof_checkout or request_leadproof_handoff.

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