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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates this is a read-only operation (retrieves a summary) and specifies the exact categories included, which avoids surprises. However, it doesn't detail return format or whether any state is affected, but for a read-only summary, this is sufficient.

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, focused sentence that front-loads the main purpose (get summary) and then lists the specific contents. No wasted words; it precisely describes what the tool does without unnecessary detail.

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?

For a zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description is complete enough to understand the tool's role. It lists all summary categories, which is the key information an agent needs to invoke it correctly. Minor gaps like explanation of each category's definition could exist, but they are well implied by the names.

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 tool has no parametersached, and schema coverage is 100% (it acknowledges no properties). The description compensates by explaining what data the summary contains, which adds meaning beyond the empty schema. Since there are no parameters, this meets the need adequately.

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 retrieves a controlled substance authority summary and enumerates the included totals (tracked registrations, renewals not started, expired, due in 30 days, awaiting issue). This is a specific resource with a clear purpose, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings; the listed contents help distinguish it implicitly.

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 is for getting a high-level summary rather than detailed searches (like search_registrations) or specific expiring registrations (get_registrations_expiring). However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any conditions like required permissions.

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