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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the description adds the genuinely useful operational facts: auth plus read:bids scope, and that a page is per-category rather than the whole book. It stops short of describing pagination totals format or what determines ordering, but the additions are real and non-obvious.

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?

Content is dense and mostly earns its place, but the opening sentence leads with paging mechanics while the actual purpose ('list my listings bucketed by lifecycle') is buried mid-paragraph. Front-loading the what-it-does before the paging caveat would make selection faster.

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 an output schema present and annotations covering safety, the description only needs to add auth scope, paging semantics, and routing — and it does all three. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds usage meaning: 'page on with offset or narrow with state_category' tells the agent how the two optional params interact with the paged-per-category model, which the schema alone does not convey.

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+resource ('list my listings') and the non-obvious scope: results bucketed by lifecycle category, seller-side, on the XP connected order book. An agent can distinguish this from get_my_tickets, get_my_listing_status and list_open_listings without opening a 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?

Explicitly names the caller condition ('authenticated seller wants to see their listings'), gives example utterances, states exclusions ('do not use for casual ticket buyers'), and routes elsewhere ('for standard ticket purchases, use search_events and get_ticket_listings'). Also tells the agent what to do when has_more is set.

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