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

No annotations are present, so the description must convey behavior. It states that the operation recovers a result with the original credential and key, and never starts new work, indicating a read-only, idempotent retrieval. It also mentions including withdrawn EV lookups, which is a specific behavioral detail.

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 two sentences, with the purpose stated first and a key constraint second. It contains no filler or redundant 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?

The description provides a clear purpose and constraint but lacks parameter semantics, which are essential for invoking the tool correctly. Given there is no output schema and no parameter descriptions, the description alone is insufficient for a complete understanding. However, the tool's scope is limited to recovery, so the missing details are mostly about input fields.

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 schema has five properties with no descriptions, and the description does not explain any of them. There is no mapping from 'fuel', 'kind', 'period', 'region', or 'payment_method' to the recovery process. The description mentions 'exact query' but doesn't connect it to the parameters, leaving the agent without guidance on how to populate the fields.

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's purpose: recovering an existing paid or trial result with original credential, idempotency key and exact query, including withdrawn EV lookups. It also explicitly states it never starts a new lookup or payment, which distinguishes it from any new-lookup functionality. The sibling tools are all 'get' operations for other data, so this is distinct.

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 gives a clear constraint: 'Never starts a new lookup or payment,' which tells the agent when not to use it. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools for starting new lookups, but the sibling list doesn't include such a tool, so the guidance is adequate. The term 'Recover' implies using it when a saved result is needed.

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